Five reasons to never depose a psych doctor without an Apricot™ - Cross Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #122

An Apricot™ is a report that provides attorneys and insurance adjusters with information about the flaws in a psych report.  An Apricot™ is written on an expert witness basis and is protected by the work product doctrine.

1. Attorneys are experts in the law and typically not experts in psychology or psychiatry.
2. Psych doctors have the upper hand when being deposed by an attorney.
3. An Apricot™ uses non-technical terms to describe the flaws in a psych report revealing that the report does not constitute substantial medical evidence.
4. An Apricot™ provides the attorney with a list of simple questions to use on cross-examination of the doctor.
5. An Apricot™ provides a list of the major problems in the doctor’s report.

When psych reports are not in your favor - What to do about it - Tip #121

Dr. Bruce Leckart conducts psychological evaluations in workers’ compensation and personal injury litigation. In addition to evaluating patients, he provides Apricots™ for attorneys and insurance adjusters who have a psych report not in their favor. An Apricot™ is a work-product privileged report used to assist an attorney in cross-examining a doctor and/or writing a trial brief for the court. Essentially, Dr. Leckart will find every flaw in the report, write up those flaws in easy-to-understand terms and provide the attorney with a list of simple questions to use in cross-examination. It doesn’t matter which state you are located in or the jurisdiction, Dr. Leckart can assist when you have a psych report that is not in your favor.

Give us a call today: (844) 444-8898

The Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST) - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #120

     The M-FAST is a 25-item, doctor-administered, brief structured interview designed to identify individuals who may be over-reporting, exaggerating, or fabricating psychological symptoms.  However, the M-Fast is not a psychological test in the sense that it presents any physical material that is administered to a patient.  Clearly, the results of the M-Fast are based on the doctor’s subjective observations, rather than the patient’s objective responses and therefore, this measure is not capable of presenting any non-interview objective data to the court.  When you find that the doctor discussed the M-Fast in their report you should ask the doctor if the M-Fast has any demonstrably effective methods for measuring the individual’s test-taking attitudes and credibility.

The MMPI K Scale - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #119

     The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is a psychological test that is considered the gold standard of test batteries used in medical legal evaluations.  The MMPI-2 was published in 1989 and has many proponents who depend on the test’s validity scales to provide information about the individual’s test-taking attitudes and credibility.  In fact, the MMPI-2 is the most commonly used version of the MMPI by psychologists and psychiatrists.  Every validity and clinical scale performance is described with a T-Score on the MMPI-2 which all have a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10.  Further, it is well known and universally accepted that T-Scores of 65 or larger are clinically significant or interpretable.  In this regard, the K Scale is one of the validity scales of the MMPI-2.  T-Scores 65 or higher on the K Scale are associated with the exaggeration of physical disability and distorting the individual’s true psychological condition.

Proverbs in a Mental Status Examination - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #118

     One of the five basic sources of information that compose a credible psychological or psychiatric examination and report is a Mental Status Examination.  A Mental Status Examination is normally part of every face-to-face clinical interview during a medical legal evaluation.  In this regard, a Mental Status Examination produces a set of observations of the patient that are made by the doctor under reasonably controlled conditions, employing a relatively standard set of examining techniques and questions.  One of those examining techniques is to ask the examinee to interpret a set of proverbs.  For example, insight can be measured by asking the patient to interpret proverbs such as “a stitch in time saves nine.”  Similarly, judgment can be measured by simply asking the person what they would do if they found a child locked in a car on a hot summer’s day.   When reading a psych report you may notice that the doctor commented on the patient’s insight and/or judgment but did not provide any easily and normally obtainable observational data concerning those processes.  Accordingly, during a deposition an attorney should ask the doctor where in their report they cited their Mental Status Examination test results supporting their conclusions about the patient’s judgment and insight.

Serial 3s Task - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #117

     When performing a Mental Status Examination during a psychological evaluation, the doctor may choose to have the patient count backward from 20 by 3s as a measure of their concentration.  This task is called a serial 3s task and can be done relatively quickly during a face-to-face interview.  The patient’s performance on a serial 3s task is a measure of concentration.  When a doctor chooses to use a serial 3s task to measure the patient’s concentration, it is imperative that they describe their observational data in their report of their Mental Status Examination. 

Serial 7s Task - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #116

     A Mental Status Examination produces a set of observations of the patient, which are made by the doctor, under reasonably controlled conditions, employing a relatively standard set of examining techniques and questions.  Measuring and reporting on observational data of the patient’s functioning in the area of concentration is typically part of every Mental Status Examination report.  For example, one measure of concentration is to ask an individual to count backwards from 100 by 7s.  This is known as a serial 7s task.  The patient’s performance on this task is a measure of their concentration and, when administered by the doctor, the doctor’s observations of the patient’s performance should be described in their report of their Mental Status Examination.

Liens for psychological and psychiatric treatment
can be disputed!

If an inspection of the data in the psych doctor's report does not support the doctor's diagnosis, the conclusion is inescapable that the doctor's report does not support the doctor's diagnosis warranting the need for mental health treatment. At that point, it is reasonable to conclude that the doctor's liens are not supported by the doctor's report. 


https://tinyurl.com/ycpxyqtq

Dysthymic Disorder - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #115

     According to the criteria found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a Dysthymic Disorder is diagnosed correctly when the individual presents with a chronically depressed mood that occurs for most of the day, more days than not, for at least two years.  During periods of depressed mood, at least two of the following additional symptoms are present:  poor appetite or overeating, insomnia or hypersomnia, low energy or fatigue, low self-esteem, poor concentration or difficulty making decisions, and feelings of hopelessness.  When you find that a psych report lacks information supporting the diagnosis of a Dysthymic Disorder, the attorney should ask the doctor, where in their report they provided historical data demonstrating that the patient met the diagnostic criteria for a Dysthymic Disorder.

A Major Depressive Disorder with Mild Severity - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #114

     A Major Depressive Disorder is a severe Mood Disorder that is characterized by a pervasive clinical depression and a series of associated symptoms.  The severity of a Major Depressive Disorder often mandates that the patient be given substantial anti-depressant medication, psychotherapy, hospitalization and possibly electroconvulsive shock therapy.  According to the criteria for Major Depressive Disorder found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, if the patient presents with five or six symptoms, the diagnostic modifier “Mild” is used in specifying the disorder.  Doctors should be questioned on cross-examination when you find they do not provide information in their report supporting their conclusions about the severity of a Major Depressive Disorder.

Neuropsychologists - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #113

Neuropsychologists have obtained either a Ph.D. or a Psy.D. in psychology and have taken additional postdoctoral training in the area of neuropsychology.  Neuropsychologists can provide information about how a neurological injury may affect and/or be affected by psychological variables.  They also can provide information about whether a patient’s difficulties are likely to be due to brain pathology or emotional factors.  Further, neuropsychologists typically administer a relatively large number of tests, called a battery, in a face-to-face manner.  Test batteries are sometimes designed by the neuropsychologist to answer specific questions and at other times standardized batteries are used.  In short, neuropsychologists are psychologists with advanced or postdoctoral training in evaluating brain functions and correlating specific cognitive and emotional impairments with specific brain pathology.

Panic Attacks - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #112

A Panic Attack is characterized by a discrete period of intense fear or discomfort in which four or more of 13 symptoms occur that develop abruptly and reach a peak within ten minutes.  A Panic Attack is not a disorder in and of itself.  When Panic Attacks are followed by one month or more of either persistent concern about having additional attacks, worry about the implications of the attacks or the consequences, or a significant change in behavior related to the attacks, the individual may meet criteria for a Panic Disorder.

Panic Disorder Without Agoraphobia, Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #111

     According to the DSM-IV-TR, a Panic Disorder Without Agoraphobia is diagnosed correctly when the individual presents with recurrent and unexpected Panic Attacks.  There must be evidence that shows that these Panic Attacks have been followed by one month or more of either persistent concern about having additional attacks, worry about the implications of the attacks or the consequences, or a significant change in behavior related to the attacks.  Further, the patient must not exhibit Agoraphobia or anxiety about being in places or situations from which escape might be difficult or embarrassing.  When a psych report lacks information supporting the DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of a Panic Disorder Without Agoraphobia, the attorney should ask the doctor, where in their report they provided historical data demonstrating that the patient met the diagnostic criteria for a Panic Disorder Without Agoraphobia.  This line of questioning will clearly reveal the flawed nature of the doctor’s report.