An attorney's approach to psychiatrists in custody cases.
The contested custody case has in common with any other case that it is a search for the truth through the medium of the courts. Many modern thinkers believe that the courts are not the proper arena for discovering the truth in all cases. Increasingly, there is agitation to remove areas of testimony from the courts, placing them perhaps in the hands of some commission appointed by government. So far, this has not happened in the area of child custody, and we still have the courtroom technique of examination and cross-examination, with a final decision by a judge on the basic subject of truth, that is, what is the best interest of the child. The attorney can learn from the doctor in this process, and I think the doctor can learn from the courts. I hope the day will come when no psychiatrist will ever say that he is too busy to take the patient's case if it is likely to involve him in legal controversy. I hope the time will come when no psychiatrist will say that he will not become involved with a case unless he can do so as an appointee of the court as opposed to a doctor employed by one of the parties. I hope the doctor will look forward to providing testimony and that some of the thoughts expressed in this discussion will make his day in court a better experience for him.
D002648:Child; D002669:Child Welfare; D005104:Expert Testimony; D005555:Forensic Psychiatry; D006801:Humans; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D007603:Jurisprudence; D014481:United States