CHAPTER ONE MENTAL HEALTH EXPERTS: SCIENCE AND THE LAW
- Mental Health Professionals as Expert Witnesses
- Types of Mental Health Experts
- The Gap between Science and Practice
- The Move Toward "Validity" and "Reliability" in the Courts
- Dealing with Mental Health Experts
- Voir Dire Questions Regarding Scientific Methodology
- Voir Dire Questions Regarding Peer Reviewed Journals
- Evidentiary Rules and Motion Practice
- Daubert Hearings
- The Importance of Voir Dire
- The Interplay Between FRE Rules 401 - 403 - 702 - and - 703
- Three Kinds of "Fit" in Expert Evidence
- Evidentiary Reliability and Validity
- Shielding the Jury from Prejudicial "Junk Science"
- The Problem of Creeping Hearsay.
CHAPTER TWO WHO QUALIFIES AS AN EXPERT?
- Overview
- Treating Therapist v. Expert Witness
- Treating Therapist v. Expert WitnessTherapeutic Alliance v. Objectivity
- Treating Therapist v. Expert WitnessDual Relationships and Ethical Obligations
- Treating Therapist v. Expert WitnessCross-Examination
- Challenging Post-graduate EducationPsychologists
- Challenging Post-graduate EducationCross-Examining the Graduate Education of Psychologists
- Challenging Post-graduate EducationThe Medical Education of Psychiatrists
- Challenging Post-graduate EducationCross-Examining the Medical Education of Psychiatrists
- Challenging Post-graduate EducationThe Graduate Education of Other Mental Professionals
- Challenging Post-graduate EducationCross-Examining The Graduate Education of Other Mental Health Professionals
- Challenging Licensure, Continuing Education, and Board CertificationPsychologists.
- Challenging Licensure, Continuing Education, and Board CertificationCross-Examining Psychologists
- Challenging Licensure, Continuing Education, and Board CertificationPsychiatrists
- Challenging Licensure, Continuing Education, and Board Certification Cross-Examining Psychiatrists
- Challenging Licensure, Continuing Education, and Board CertificationSocial Workers, Professional Counselors and Marriage and Family Therapists.
CHAPTER THREE CHALLENGING CLINICAL JUDGEMENT
- Overview
- Overlooking NormalcyResearch
- Overlooking NormalcyCross-Examining the Disregard of Normalcy
- Preconceived ExpectationsResearch
- Preconceived ExpectationsCross-examination
- Ruling In v. Ruling OutResearch
- Ruling In v. Ruling Out-Cross-examination
- Selective Recall of Mental Health ProfessionalsResearch
- Selective Recall of Mental Health ProfessionalsCross-Examination
- Anchoring Biases of Mental Health ProfessionalsResearch
- Anchoring BiasesCross-Examination
- Attribution BiasResearch
- Attribution BiasCross-Examination
- Clinical Judgment and Inter-rater ReliabilityResearch
- Cross-Examination Related to Judgmental Consistency
- Clinical Judgment v. Actuarial ProceduresResearch
- Clinical Judgment v. Actuarial ProceduresCross-Examination
CHAPTER FOUR CHALLENGING CLAIMS OF PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
- Claims of Professional ExperienceUnavailability of Feedback
- Claims of Professional ExperienceCross-Examining Unavailability of Feedback
- The Professional Experience of PsychologistsResearch
- Professional Experience of PsychologistsCross-Examination Questions
- The Professional Experience of PsychiatristsResearch
- The Professional Experience of Psychiatrists Cross-Examination
- Claims of Expertise as a Treating Therapist-Research
- Claims