Skip to main content

It Takes A Renegade Psychologist To Expose Flawed Psych Reports

    I’ve been writing this newsletter and publishing one issue each month since 2009. This is the 140th issue of my newsletter providing what I feel is valuable information for attorneys and insurance adjusters who read medical-legal reports from psychologists, psychiatrists and neuropsychologists. All of my newsletters can be downloaded for free from my website: DrLeckartWETC.com. The motivation for writing these newsletters has been my 30+ years of evaluating approximately 10,000 personal injury and workers’ compensation litigants and my time as a university professor at San Diego State University, during which it has been no secret that psychologists, psychiatrists and neuropsychologists who write medical-legal reports count on not being called on their errors because it is difficult to find a doctor who is willing to stand up and call them on their mistakes. Perhaps they count on their “fraternity” and “sorority” brothers and sisters in the profession not to make waves. Certainly, they do not expect a renegade doctor like myself to get in their face and testify in court or in written format about the full extent of their incompetent written reporting and/or verbal testimony.

    I have found great pleasure in publishing the issues of my newsletter over the past 11 years during which I have taken on the medical-legal community and focused my attention on helping attorneys win cases by effectively and efficiently cross-examining psychologists and psychiatrists who have authored flawed psych reports. The most substantial error made by doctors of flawed reports is that they fail to provide sufficient data to support their diagnosis. To provide a credible diagnosis the doctor must use at least three sources of information and show that the patient meets the DSM diagnostic criteria for the disorder they diagnosed. First, they must take the patient’s life history, including a complete accounting of their current symptoms or complaints, with a history of their frequency, intensity, duration, onset and course over time. Second, they have to give a Mental Status Examination that measures the patient’s memory, concentration, judgment and insight with a battery of well-known face-to-face administered procedures. Third, they must administer a battery of objective psychological tests that have been demonstrated by published research in peer reviewed professional journals to be both valid and reliable and capable of assessing the examinee’s credibility. Additionally, when available they must review the patient’s records for data confirming their diagnosis and, when available, interview the patient’s friends, relatives and/or co-workers for further substantiation of their diagnosis.

    The conventional psych doctor would shy away from exposing the substantial flaws found in the reports authored by their colleagues, or “fraternity” and “sorority” brothers and sisters. I suppose that makes me unconventional, or what I was recently called (and embraced) by an attorney, a “renegade” in the field! Whatever the appropriate word or phrase, I absolutely love my work in reviewing flawed psych reports and providing adjusters or attorneys a written analysis that discusses every flaw in non-technical jargon and provides the attorney with a script of simple questions to use in cross-examining the report’s author to get their errors on the record.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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