Timothy M. Tippins
This column recently discussed some of the controversies surrounding the use of psychological testing in connection with forensic custody reports and testimony. (Tippins, T.M., “Psychological Testing: Controversy and Consensus,” July 18, 2018). It was there noted that many within the community of forensic psychologists—at least among those who concern themselves with such things as reliability and validity—consider the use of computer-based test interpretations (CBTI’s) in forensic settings to be improper and perhaps even unethical practice. (James R. Flens & Leslie Drozd, Psychological Testing In Child Custody Evaluations 17 [Routledge; 2005]). Accordingly, it is incumbent upon lawyers confronting a custody evaluation that relies upon a CBTI report to consider mounting a forceful challenge. This article will explore some of the evidentiary issues presented when CBTI’s are used and will highlight some instructive recent decisions from the criminal law arena that may provide useful guidance in advancing such a challenge.
Context: The Interpretive Process
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
