ABSTRACT
The plaintiff ’s view of malingering will be examined here using principles enunciated in the emerging field of medical jurisprudence called “neurolaw.” Neurolaw is chiefly concerned with the medicolegal ramifications of neurological injuries-especially traumatic brain injury (TBI) (Taylor, 1991; Taylor, Harp, & Elliott, 1991). Since its inception, health professionals have embraced neurolaw, and several journals have devoted entire issues to its principles, e.g., NeuroRehabilitation, 16(2) (2001); Brain Injury Source, 4(3) (2000). Additionally, a legal treatise dealing with neurolaw has been published (Taylor, 1997). As we delineate the plaintiff ’s perspective on malingering, we shall review various tenets of neurolaw, so neuropsychologists may learn how neurolaw interfaces with neuropsychology. For now it suffices to say that much, if not all, of the plaintiff ’s perspective on malingering rests upon principles of neurolaw.
