title: [Assessment of the psychic sequelae of traumatisation].
abstract: This article deals with the question why experts quite frequently arrive at totally opposite judgements in clinical psychotraumatological expert opinions. This often leads to intense controversially conducted arguments resulting in lengthy proceedings. The reasons for this will be presented for two cases taken from expert opinions issued for the "Soziales Entschädigungs- und Ausländerrecht" (Laws for Social Reparations and Foreigners). A brief synopsis on the legal background will be given and solutions suggested.
authors.affiliation: Behandlungszentrum für Folteropfer, Berlin. f.haenel@bzfo.de
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Haenel
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000374:Aggression / Q000523:psychology; D000647:Amnesia / Q000209:etiology; D001007:Anxiety / Q000209:etiology / Q000523:psychology; D039721:Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; D005104:Expert Testimony; D005260:Female; D005858:Germany; D005859:Germany, East; D006801:Humans; D007883:Legislation, Medical; D001523:Mental Disorders / Q000209:etiology* / Q000523:psychology; D008875:Middle Aged; D011056:Political Systems; D011329:Prisoners / Q000523:psychology; D011595:Psychomotor Agitation / Q000209:etiology / Q000523:psychology; D013313:Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic / Q000209:etiology / Q000523:psychology; D014104:Torture / Q000523:psychology; D014421:Turkey / Q000208:ethnology; D014947:Wounds and Injuries / Q000150:complications* / Q000523:psychology