PSYCHIATRY ARTICLES PAGE 2

9/27/2011· Psychiatry

How Child Psychiatric Testimony Works

By: Dr. Gilbert Kliman

The legal system and juries customarily weigh evidence more regularly than the psychoanalytic profession.

8/23/2011· Psychiatry

Assessing Emotional Damages in Multi-Plaintiff Litigation

By: Dr. Mark Levy

An hour earlier, a commuter train with 180 passengers struck a sport utility vehicle left on the tracks-an aborted suicide attempt. The parking lot adjacent to the tracks is filled with people dazed and confused.

2/15/2011· Psychiatry

Testifying in Contested Custody Litigation

By: Anasseril E. Daniel

Testifying in court or at deposition is a challenging and at times, disconcerting experience even for the seasoned expert.

3/25/2010· Forensic Psychiatry

Competency To Make A Will: Testamentary Capacity / Undue Influence

By: Pogos H. Voskanian, MD

Wills are generally contested either on the grounds that the testator lacked Testamentary Capacity (was incompetent to make a will at the time of signing it) or the testator, because of his/her mental state, was subject to Undue Influence (i.e. if there is evidence of coercion, manipulation, deception, compulsion, intimidation, etc.) or an Undue Influence secondary to a thought disturbance (such as delusions affecting the testator's free will in making decisions).

5/28/2009· Human Factors

How to Read a Psychiatric Report

By: Dr. Stephen M. Raffle

All psychiatric reports evaluate something, but not always the same thing. For example, eligibility for benefits, or fitness to do a job. To make sense of the report, the reader must determine what is being evaluated and how it is being done

5/28/2009· Psychiatry

The Therapist as Expert Witness? Reasons the Treating Psychotherapist Should Not Be the Expert Witness

By: Dr. Stephen M. Raffle

In civil cases where emotional distress is alleged, it often occurs that the plaintiff’s attorney designates the treater as his expert. Usually the argument is that the plaintiff’s own therapist has spent many more hours with the plaintiff than the defense expert and therefore "knows" the plaintiff better. The treater often agrees with this reasoning