Evaluation of Psychological Damages

Forensic Psychology, Psychological Injuries and the Law

“…Further, if the expert does not meet licensing requirements in the given jurisdiction, he or she may not be permitted to do an evaluation and/or testify. In nine states or provinces, interjurisdictional practice (other than testimony) is forbidden: Alabama, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Michigan (unless licensed in a contiguous state), Ontario, Newfoundland/ Labrador, Saskatchewan, and South Carolina (see also McLearen et al 2004;Melton et al 2007;Tucillo et al 2002;Simon and Shuman 1999). New Hampshire permits testimony, but if the psychologist testifies regarding treatment recommendations, he or she is in violation of state laws governing the practice of psychology.…”

“…Contact information for all of the provincial and state licensing boards is available from the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards at http://www.asppb.org. If a court requests that a psychologist do an evaluation, unless statutes and administrative code are very clear regarding the legality of going to that state or province, the psychologist should request a ruling regarding his or her freedom to do the evaluation and testify regarding conclusions without concern for a licensing/certifying board action (Ackerman and Kane 2005;McLearen et al 2004;Shuman et al 2003;Simon and Shuman 1999). The psychologist should keep in mind, however, that courts in a foreign jurisdiction have no authority over a licensing or certifying board in the psychologist's jurisdiction and cannot prevent the psychologist's licensing or certifying board from taking action against the psychologist for the psychologist's actions in the foreign jurisdiction.…”

“…The TSI addresses ten types of posttraumatic responses; it has three validity scales as well (Briere 2004;Briere et al 1995;Demare' and Briere 1996;Edens et al 1998). An alternative for the expert who wishes to use an instrument with a documented correlation with the criteria for PTSD in DSM-IV-TR is the DAPS (Briere 2004;Greenberg et al 2003;McLearen et al 2004). The DAPS also includes two validity scales and assesses comorbid conditions often found with PTSD: dissociation, substance abuse, and suicidality (see also Chapters 6-8 in Briere 2004).…”

Widening the net: Use of social media data in personal injury and disability evaluations

“…A foundational tenet of forensic mental health assessment (FMHA) is the use of multiple sources of data. Indeed, use of a multisource, multimethod assessment strategy to gather and review reliable and relevant information is a well-established standard of competent forensic assessment practice (Heilbrun et al, 2003(Heilbrun et al, , 2001McLearen et al, 2004;Melton et al, 2018), a practice codified in Guideline 9.02 Use of Multiple Sources of Information of the Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology (SGFP; APA, 2013). Traditionally, these sources have included clinical interviews with and observations of the examinee, review of written records, standardized psychological test data, and interviews with collateral sources.…”