Trashing Flawed Psych Reports

In the words of John Henry Wigmore, cross-examination is “beyond any doubt the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.”

3 Wigmore, Evidence §1367, p. 27 (2d ed. 1923)

The Problem:  You’ve got a psych case in which a doctor diagnosed a disorder and concluded that the patient has had a psychiatric injury and is psychiatrically disabled.  You also have lots of collateral information indicating that none of this is true. 

How do you cross-examine the doctor?

If you’re an attorney working on a psych case there is only one way to trash an unsubstantial or incompetent report.  When you take the doctor’s deposition or trial testimony you attack the doctor’s DSM diagnosis by showing that their report doesn’t support their diagnosis. 

If the diagnostic manual’s criteria are not supported by the data in the doctor’s report, the doctor’s
diagnosis and all the conclusions flowing from that diagnosis are worthless. 

If you take any other approach the doctor will simply hide behind their “professional opinion.”  Quite simply, all other approaches or strategies may produce piddling results but will not produce a prideful, winning outcome.

I’ve been singing the same song for over thirty years of critiquing tens of thousands of psych reports.  The only thing that consistently works is attacking the doctor’s diagnosis.

You want to know how to do that?  Ask me! 

(844) 444-8898.  No charge for the phone call.

End of the story.