Living and Working in Two Worlds: The Psychoanalyst in the Office, and the Psychoanalyst as Forensic Expert in the Courtroom

Abstract

The responsibilities of the psychoanalyst who enters the courtroom as a forensic expert are different from those of the treating psychoanalyst. The public exposure of the psychoanalytic forensic expert's work in the courtroom often becomes grounds for attempts to denigrate and deflate the self-esteem and credibility of the forensic expert. Yet, the courtroom is an exciting arena for the application of psychoanalytic theory and concepts, and the psychoanalytic method. The author shows how psychoanalytic adult and child training actually enhance the success of both the forensic evaluation and Court testimony.

Notes

¹Experts often have opinions about the charges (the guilt or innocence) and in their enthusiasm, or narcissism, often express these opinions as part of their testimony. In effect, this usurps the jury/judge function as trier of fact and is resented by the jury/judge and undermines the testimony of the expert.

²Legal ethics and practice advise a judge to recuse himself or herself if there is a conflict of interest or the perception of one. These principles have evolved to protect the judge and public from bias and prejudice lest it shatter the illusion of a disinterested judiciary.

³Should the psychoanalytic forensic expert even attempt to violate the patient's/litigant's confidential relationship with the therapist? This poses a serious ethical question, with some psychoanalytic forensic experts and treating psychoanalysts believing that any violation of the patient's confidentiality is too much.

⁴These problems, which can occur when living and working in the two worlds of treating psychoanalyst and psychoanalytic forensic expert, are not prevented and/or controlled merely by an awareness of their existence. Peer supervision, meetings with a senior mentor, and/or discussion of these problems within one's own psychoanalysis or psychotherapy may be required, even for a brief period of time. It is my position that the psychoanalyst/psychoanalytic forensic expert, most likely, will be more aware that something is not right than would an unanalyzed forensic expert.

⁵This case was reported to me by the child's psychotherapist, who felt that the child decompensated when told of the pending custody transfer. She was not open to any discussion in the therapy sessions about the parental alienation or her parents. Occasionally, she would comment about something related to school. She would play board games with the therapist and often sat huddled on the floor of the therapist's office with her coat on, like she did at her father's house, months later after the Court-ordered transfer and after the father's consent for her to return to the home of her mother and maternal grandmother. The Court's emphasis on external change, that is change of custody, did not consider that sufficient internal change for this dramatic change in the child's life had not taken place and therefore, may have been traumatic for the child.