Skip to main content

3 Ways to Deal With Psych Reports During the COVID-19 Pandemic

    The COVID-19 pandemic has certainly demanded pause in many aspects of life. However, something that will never cease are mental problems experienced by humans. In fact, early studies show that the chaos of the current pandemic has elevated mental and emotional problems, some of which are experienced by essential workers because of the stress of their essential job. Attorneys and insurance professionals who handle personal injury and/or workers’ compensation claims are likely working remotely and have begun to see claims of mental or emotional injury due to events associated with COVID-19. Attorneys and adjusters who handle psych cases stemming from events of COVID-19, or any psych case antedating the COVID-19 pandemic, will be in a good position if they are able to understand the report submitted by a psychologist, psychiatrist, or neuropsychologist. 

    I’ve been doing medical-legal evaluations on a psychological basis for over 30 years. In addition to evaluating patients with personal injury or workers’ compensation claims, I am firmly dedicated to helping attorneys and insurance professionals understand the psych reports they receive and empowering them to see better outcomes with their psych cases. While my attorney-client privileged consultations can be done on the phone, they are most effective in a written report format that the report can be taken to and used during depositions and trials. I call these written-reports Apricots™. 

    Of course, the current pandemic situation has probably “paused” in-person depositions and court appearances indefinitely. No need to worry. You can still challenge the psych doctor’s report with an Apricot™. An Apricot™ is a written analysis of the substantial flaws that exist in the psych doctor’s report that can be used to cross-examine the doctor by video or phone, to draft a trial brief or petition for the court, and/or to negotiate a favorable settlement with the opposition. 

    1) Cross-Examine the Doctor by Video or Telephone 

    Attorneys working remotely can cross-examine a psych doctor by video or phone using an Apricot™. Apricots™ provide information that an attorney needs to successfully cross-examine a psychiatrist, a psychologist or a neuropsychologist. It also provides an extensive list of questions that will expose the flaws in a psych doctor’s report during cross-examination. 

    2) Draft a Trial Brief 

    Current stay-at-home orders may prevent attorneys from taking the doctor’s deposition and/or trial testimony. When taking the doctor’s testimony by video and/or phone is also not an option, or not desired, an Apricot™ can be used to draft a brief for the court. Apricots™ are written reports that describe the major flaws that exist in psych reports using easy-to-understand terminology that provides information that an attorney needs to successfully draft a brief. Attorneys simply copy and paste the short paragraphs with citations to the psychological literature that describe the report’s fatal flaws from the Apricot™ into the trial brief. 

    3) Negotiate a Favorable Settlement 

    An overwhelming majority of psychological and psychiatric reports are flawed and do not constitute substantial medical evidence. An Apricot™ will describe all of the flaws found in a report submitted by psychologists, psychiatrists and/or neuropsychologists. Apricots™ are written on an expert witness basis where the written report is not admissible but protected by the work product doctrine and completely confidential. However, attorneys can choose to use the Apricot™ as a negotiating tool with the opposing attorney. 

    In summary, if you are an attorney or adjuster who handles psych cases in general, and psych cases that are the result of events of the COVID-19 pandemic in particular, you can use an Apricot™ to help see better outcomes. Working remotely should not have to preclude you from challenging the psych doctor’s conclusions or accepting a flawed report. In fact, a recent testimonial from a defense attorney communicates the essence of an Apricot™. According to the attorney, the Apricot™ was the most thorough document she has encountered and used almost all of the questions provided. She indicated that she was able to completely discredit the doctor’s diagnosis of a Major Neurocognitive Disorder during deposition to the point that the opposing attorney was staring at her in shock (mouth agape) while she was asking the doctor questions provided by the Apricot™.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Horror Story For Insurance Companies

     John Jones gets injured. For this horror story, it doesn’t matter if he was at work or shopping in a supermarket. It doesn’t even matter how the claimed injury occurred or even if he was really injured.       John gets a lawyer to represent his interests. For the sake of discussion, let’s assume the lawyer files the claim saying the injury was psychological or psychiatric. The lawyer then sends John to a psychologist or a psychiatrist for an evaluation and treatment. The doctor writes a report stating that John had an injury. He begins treatment. The insurance company representing the defendant sends John to another doctor for an opinion. That doctor doesn’t completely concur with John’s lawyer’s doctor but agrees that John was psychologically injured.       At some later time in the claims process, the insurance company pays John some money to compensate him for his injury. John, his lawyer, the insurance company, the defense’s lawyer, and both doctors are all happy with the sett
Post a Comment
Read more

Understanding The Source of Weak Psych Reports

If you’re an attorney or an adjuster in workers’ compensation or personal injury, general liability, or any jurisdiction where a psych doctor produces a report of their evaluation or treatment in response to the claim of a mental injury, you are always confronted with psych reports that are weak. But do you understand them and do you know how to defeat them? Let me help you do both! This month I’ll tell you how to understand them. In the next two months, I’ll tell you how to beat them.   Many of you who have referred workers’ compensation and personal injury cases to me over the last three plus decades know that I have evaluated between 5,000 and 10,000 applicants and plaintiffs. As part of my practice I’ve read tens of thousands of psych reports, the vast majority of which are demonstrably substantially flawed.    First, a little of my professional history will help to understand what I think is going on. For the first 30 years after getting my Ph.D. I was a full-time college professo
Post a Comment
Read more

Flawed Psych Reports: Winners and Losers

     I have to admit that for the 35 years I have been practicing forensic psychology I have been on a crusade.       Before I started my practice I was a tenured full professor, an academic who did research, wrote and edited journal articles and books, served on Ph.D. committees and taught a variety of courses. Believe it or not, although I wrote a book on boredom, eventually my life at the university became boring. One afternoon while playing tennis with an orthopedist friend I was complaining about my boredom when he said, “Have you ever thought about doing workers’ compensation?” I said, “What’s that?” He replied that he would bring me some psych reports and did so at our next tennis game. I took a quick look at those reports and said, “You’re kidding! This is garbage. I can do a better job standing on my head.” That was the beginning of the biggest change in my life!       For the last 35 years I’ve focused on how awful most medical-legal reports are. In fact, I’ve read what I est
Post a Comment
Read more