Psychologists v. Psychiatrists

Who Best to Hire as an Expert? Psychologists have either a Ph.D. or a Psy.D. degree in psychology.  A Ph.D. is a research oriented degree whereas a Psy.D. is a treatment oriented degree.  Psychiatrists have M.D. degrees.  Psychiatrists are trained and more knowledgeable about psychotropic medication and treatment, which are rarely concerns in litigation.  Psychologists are trained and more knowledgeable about psychological testing than psychiatrists.  In most psych medical-legal reports the basic question is, “Has the claimant suffered a psychological injury?”  The answer hinges on the doctor’s diagnosis.  Both psychologists and psychiatrists use five sources of information to arrive at a diagnosis, the three most important of which are:  the patient’s life history and their presenting complaints, the doctor’s Mental Status Examination results and the objective psychological testing data.  Of the three only the psychological testing provides objective information about a diagnosis and patient credibility that can be presented to the court.   Given the above, “Who do you think can write a more credible and comprehensive medical-legal report?”  “Who will provide better testimony?”  Finally, consider this.  I’ve read at least 30,000 psych reports over the last 30 years and cannot recall ever reading a single one in which a psychologist found it necessary to hire a psychiatrist to help with the examination.  In contrast, I frequently see reports written by psychiatrists who hire psychologists to interpret the testing.  "What does this tell you?"  “Who do you want on your side?”

More help for cross-examining psych doctors can be found at Dr. Leckart’s website (www.drleckartwetc.com) and in his book Psychological Evaluations In Litigation:  A Practical Guide for Attorneys and Insurance Adjusters (http://drleckartwetc.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/FINAL-051311.pdf).