Due Care, Not Prohibition of Expert Opinions

Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 335-338

  Melton, Gary B ^a  

^a CLEMSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Advocacy; Custody; Divorce; Expert testimony; Forensic psychology

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141856689     PISSN: 09695893     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/clipsy.6.3.335     Document Type: Review

References (5)

1. Bonnie, R. J., & Slobogin, C. (1980). The role of mental health professionals in the criminal process: The case for informed speculation. Virginia Law Review, 66, 427-522.
2. Convention on the Rights of the Child, U. N. Doc. A/Res/44/ 25 (1989).
3. Melton, G. B. (1990). Law, science, and humanity: The normative foundation of social science in law. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 315-332.
4. Melton, G. B. (1994). Expert opinions: "Not for cosmic understanding." In B. D. Sales & G. Van den Bos (Eds.), Psychology in litigation and legislation (pp. 55-99). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
5. Melton, G. B., Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (1997). Psychological evaluations for the courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.