Sometimes, after a best interest or relocation evaluation has been performed, an attorney may request that another psychologist review the evaluation because the attorney believes that the evaluation has shortcomings. The expert’s opinion is not consistent with the data or issues were not adequately addressed. In this case, the attorney consults with his or her client and recommends that another psychologist review the evaluation.
I will review the evaluation in an objective and neutral manner considering its strengths and weaknesses. Among the factors I consider while performing a review: are the expert’s opinions supported by the data? Is the methodology flawed? Were the appropriate tests administered and interpreted? Was sufficient data collected? Is there evidence of confirmatory bias? Were allegations adequately assessed? If the evaluation was adequately conducted, I inform the attorney. If there are significant shortcomings, I inform the attorney of them. The attorney may then decide to retain me as a testifying expert. I will not offer opinions about custody or parenting time because I will not have interviewed the parties or their child/ren. My task performing a work-product review is to assist the court in making its decision. The best way that I can be of assistance is to remain neutral and objective about the expert’s evaluation.