Abstract
The quality of court-ordered psychiatric and psychological evaluations has been the focus of substantial debate. The recent development of guidelines for writing expert reports, the improvement of forensic training opportunities for psychologists and psychiatrists and the implementation of a stricter regulation of mental health professionals admitted as experts in court have laid the groundwork for higher quality expert evaluations. Overall, the measures appear to yield a positive effect, although instances of questionable quality remain. The current review illustrates the potential for improvement and underlines the fact that all involved disciplines must act to ensure that only high-quality reports are used in court.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
