Practices in Forensic Neuropsychology: Perspectives of Neuropsychologists and Trial Attorneys
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology
Members of the National Academy of Neuropsychology and the Association of Trial Lawyers of America were surveyed concerning current practices in forensic neuropsychology. The majority of neuropsychologists and attorneys reported that attorneys never observe neuropsychological testing. Attorneys reported receiving raw data in almost all of their brain injury cases, but neuropsychologists reported that they produce raw data in only a minority of their forensic cases. Similarly, fewer neuropsychologists than attorneys acknowledged that they are asked to provide information to assist the lawyer in preparing for the cross-examination of the opposition's expert or to prepare the plaintiff for the opposition's evaluation. Lawyers typically spend up to an hour preparing their clients for neuropsychological evaluations and commonly cover test content, detection of malingering, and brain injury symptoms. Other topics addressed include attorney influence on findings, fees and billing, board certification, use of technicians, and methods used to generate referrals or locate experts. Areas of agreement and divergence between the groups were identified and ethical issues raised by identified practices were examined
Essig, S. M.,
Petersen, R. S.,
Cooper, J. T.
(2001). Practices in Forensic Neuropsychology: Perspectives of Neuropsychologists and Trial Attorneys. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 16(3), 271-291.
Available at: http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cps_facarticles/143