Ethical considerations in forensic neuropsychological consultation

Abstract

Ethical guidelines applicable to forensic neuropsychology pertain mostly to the role of the expert witness. However, forensic neuropsychologists may also serve as consultants, frequently for the defense in civil suits, to assist defense lawyers to challenge and discredit opposing plaintiffs' to experts. In this role, the neuropsychologist frequently does not testify and works in anonymity. The neuropsychology consultant has the knowledge and resources that could lead to clinical data being used in a misleading manner to discredit the opposing expert under cross-examination. However, there are no ethical principles to guide the consultant's behavior in this domain. To our knowledge, this issue has not been discussed in the literature although it may play an important role in how neuropsychological data and testimony are presented in a courtroom. The authors suggest that these issues be raised and discussed in order that the field come to some consensus regarding limits, if any, of how information is used to challenge expert testimony.