Professor Mike Wang, chair of the Association of Clinical Psychologists UK, said the change would be a big step forward.
However, the proposal says an unregulated expert can still be used if the issue in question can only be resolved with the expertise of someone who is not regulated, though the judge would have to give reasons for their decision.
Wang said: “I think the intentions are very good and I think it’s going to be much harder if not impossible for bogus expert witnesses to be appointed to give evidence in the family courts.
“But we would say the exception should be removed. We are worried there are some judges who may use this loophole to justify carrying on using someone who is not regulated.”
Wang also said the courts should not use the exception to avoid delays.
“Ultimately if it means there is a delay because you are waiting for an expert to become free then that is what must happen – you can’t sacrifice the quality of an assessment in order to meet a time constraint. The crucial issue is whether you are getting competent advice. There isn’t a public safety justification for the loophole.”
The proposed rules apply to all expert witnesses but the concerns have predominantly related to expert psychologists, who are often instructed to the courts to give advice on mental health, substance misuse, trauma, relationship difficulties and abuse.
Source link