Short answer. Yes. Rule 132, Section 10 allows leading questions when there is difficulty getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is a child of tender years, among other listed situations. If your child is struggling to answer clearly, the examining lawyer may frame questions that suggest the answer to help draw out testimony.
What the law says
When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, a child of tender years, is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute
Rule 132, Section 10 — Leading and misleading questions. Read the full provision →
The general rule against leading questions
Rule 132, Section 10 defines a leading question as a question which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party desires, and as a general rule it is not allowed on direct examination. The concern is that a question phrased to hand the witness the answer produces testimony that reflects the lawyer's framing more than the witness's own memory. That general prohibition, though, is written with several named exceptions, and one of them speaks directly to a child struggling to testify clearly.
The exception for a child of tender years
The rule allows leading questions when there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, a child of tender years, is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute. A child witness is named specifically because the law recognizes that a young child may struggle to answer open-ended questions in a way that is clear and understandable, not because a child's account is treated as less reliable. This exception lets the examining lawyer, subject to the court's control, use more structured questions to help the child communicate what happened.
What this does not do
Being allowed to lead a child witness is different from being allowed to plant a fact in the child's mouth. The rule separately bars misleading questions, defined as one that assumes as true a fact the witness has not yet testified to, or that contradicts something the witness already said, and that bar applies regardless of the witness's age. So a lawyer examining a child may phrase questions that suggest a yes-or-no answer or narrow down a topic, but cannot use that leeway to feed the child facts the child never actually stated.
Who controls how far it goes
The exception does not hand the examining lawyer unlimited discretion; it operates under the trial court's control over the manner of examining witnesses. Whether a particular child needs leading questions, and how far that leeway should extend, is something the judge assesses as the examination unfolds, watching how the child is actually responding. The opposing side is also free to object if a question crosses from helping a child answer clearly into supplying an answer the child has not actually given, and the court rules on that objection as it would any other.