Areas of confusion

The publication by the University of Central Lancashire of a summary report “Evaluating Expert Witness Psychological Reports: Exploring Quality” by Professor Jane Ireland in February 2012 was thought by many psychologists who work as expert witnesses to have created confusion about:

– the status of the recommendations in the summary report;
– the titles, qualifications and work of psychologists as expert witnesses.

This document has been prepared in order to clarify the situation by restating the facts as they stand at present and reprinted with the permission of the National Centre for Applied Psychology.

Status of the recommendations in the summary report

Professor Ireland’s study was undertaken as the result of an initiative of the Family Justice Council (FJC) and was part funded by the Council. The report of the study has not yet been accepted by the FJC but was nonetheless released to the media and has since been referred to widely. It has generated considerable controversy. A number of methodological criticisms have been made of the study. The FJC is understood to have asked Professor Ireland to submit the report to peer-review of the methodology, findings and conclusions by the academic and professional community with a view to revision and eventual publication in a professional journal should it meet the requisite standards. In view of that procedure, those issues are not addressed in this document.

The FJC has clearly stated that it is currently developing consensus-based standards for expert witnesses and that it intends to publish them, for consultation, as soon as possible. The FJC has not referred to, promulgated or recommended use of any so-called “Ireland Criteria” for psychologists as expert witnesses. Therefore any reference to such criteria, as if they have been established and accepted, is premature.