This unique short course focuses on situations where psychotherapists or counselors serve as expert witnesses in court. Such a dual role has been dubbed forensic dual relationship or forensic multiple relationship. Many psychotherapists, counselors and other mental health practitioners are neither aware of the numerous issues involved in such dual relationships nor always see it coming. A treating therapist does not necessarily know in advance if their patient will be involved in litigation and may not know how to respond when they are being called to testify in a case that may involve personal injury or medical malpractice.

In a litigated case, it is quite routine for an attorney to seek out forensic mental health experts. It is also quite common for attorneys to contact a treating therapist. Thus, under what circumstance, if any, should a treating therapist provide expert witness in the same case? In the forensic arena, there are many risks when an attorney calls the treating therapist and asks them to become an expert witness. Upon undertaking a new role, the therapist may enter into an improper or unethical dual relationship. The psychotherapist or counselor's role is that of a patient advocate, which often presents irreconcilable conflict with the objective-evaluative role of a forensic expert. Psychotherapists are generally biased in favor of their clients, while forensic experts are committed to a truthful, objective and unbiased reporting to the court. As a result, there are several serious ethical and legal implications when serving either simultaneously or successively as a treater and expert witness in the same case. The forensic-therapist dual relationship often presents conflicts of interest and, as a result, is often unethical and should be avoided under most circumstances.

This course reviews certain situations where therapists may end up in a forensic multiple role. A few examples: psychotherapist voluntarily agrees to switch roles from a treater to an expert witness and to testify on behalf of their client in order to be ‘helpful’ to the client. The current therapist may terminate a patient and assume that there is no ethical problem in testifying as an expert. Another area of concern is if the therapist is subpoenaed to testify as an expert witness. A third area of vulnerability for a treating clinician occurs when they are subtlety or abruptly pulled into the role of an expert during a deposition.