ABSTRACT
Clinicians in the role of child advocate in the courtroom may find themselves in conflict because what may be important for legal purposes may be psychologically detrimental to the child. The usual role of the clinician with regard to courts has been as an expert witness. The clinician describes any damage done and the child's functioning, from which several recommendations are then made. A recommendation to the lawyers was that the children be removed from the particular school that had punished them severely and placed in schools that were more benign and understanding. The traditional role of the clinician, thus, is as an outsider who has knowledge and expertise that can aid the court in making a decision. More nontraditional ways of using mental health services in courtroom settings have taken place. This is particularly true in such areas as civil rights cases and class action suits where the issues are much broader than the individual child.
