Neuropsychology has become an increasingly active participant in
forensie issues over the past decade. This has been the result of
increased recognition by psychologists of the potential role they can
play in evaluating patients involved in lawsuits and the increasing
sophistication of lawyers who have recognized that damages can go beyond
claims of physical and motoric impairment. However, this increase in
involvement has not always been matched by a more sophisticated
recognition of how the client (whether plaintiff or defendant) can best
be served by the neuropsychologist. I have personally seen or reviewed
many cases in which the psychologists involved did not effectively
present their case. This partially occurred because they failed to
recognize the difference in presentations aimed at clinical audiences
and those aimed at a legal proceeding. It also occurred because they
failed to recognize that the standard of proof necessary is very
different in a hospital and in a courtroom. Finally, it occurred because
they rarely recognized what the unique role of the psychologist can be
in either countering or supporting the testimony of medical specialists.
The purpose of this volume is to bring some light on these questions.
The presentations here are write-ups of the work presented at the Third
Annual Conference on the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery held
in Omaha during May, 1985. All of the papers emphasize the role of the
Luria-Nebraska but the ideas can be used with almost any test.
