Citation

Gutheil TG, Commons ML, Drogin EY, Hauser MJ, Miller PM, Richardson AM. Int. J. Law Psychiatry 2012; 35(5-6): 452-455.

Affiliation

Program in Psychiatry and the Law, Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, United States. Electronic address: gutheiltg@cs.com.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.ijlp.2012.09.020

PMID

23040715

Abstract

Forensic mental health professionals (n=44) reviewed a series of statements that an attorney might make to a consulting or testifying expert. Each statement was rated for its degree of appropriateness to either the consulting or the testifying role. In light of increasing attention paid to this topic in the forensic practice literature, as well as long-standing distinctions recognized by the legal profession, it was originally hypothesized that participants would differentiate clearly between these roles; however, results of this pilot study indicate that forensic practitioners do not possess a consistent sense of which activities rest most comfortably within testimonial as opposed to consulting duties.

Language: en