So,Doctor, How's Your Sex Life? A Cross-Examiner's View of Countertransference

ABSTRACT

Bias can taint the forensic work product to a far greater degree than many lawyers and judges, as relatively unsophisticated consumers of psychological expertise, are aware. Daniel Pickar's article, “Countertransference Bias in the Child Custody Evaluator” (this issue) describes the deep roots and potential impact on evaluations that can emerge from countertransference thoughts and feelings forming in the shadows of the evaluator's psyche. This article examines countertransference bias primarily from the perspective of the cross-examining attorney charged with the obligation of revealing possible sources of invalidity underlying the expert's conclusions. It addresses also the legitimate concerns raised by David A. Martindale and Jonathan W. Gould that the wholesale importation of a highly nuanced and potentially confusing lexicon from psychoanalytic theory may yield more confusion than clarity. Finally, this article cautions as to the potentially fatal implications to evidentiary admissibility which may be encountered if an evaluator should, as suggested by Pickar, premise his or her conclusions, in part, on the subjective interpretation of counter-transference thoughts and feelings.