Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals was a landmark case for forensic psychology professionals as it deviated from the Frye test, which is used as the threshold for judging the reliability of scientific evidence and expert witness credibility. As a result of the Daubert standard, many courts now incorporate language such as Is the methodology underlying the testimony scientifically valid? during pretrial interviews, as well as during the actual trial.

The Daubert standard creates a specific standard for judges to use when deciding whether an expert can testify to all aspects of his or her area of expertise and prepared testimony or whether the expert is qualified enough even to testify in the case. In order for a Daubert issue to arise, one of the attorneys in the case presents a Daubert challenge. This prompts the judge to hold a hearing to determine whether the pending testimony of the expert would meet the standard as outlined in Daubert. To be of use to the courts and to provide admissible testimony, forensic psychology professionals must use procedures that meet the level of scientific rigor accepted by their area of expertise, as well as by the court.

In order to do this, you must be aware of the standard used by the specific court in which you are to testify, and you must be willing and able to abide by those standards to sound credible and have your testimony accepted in court.
summarize the case you used in the Discussion, including any mental health issues that were involved.

• Explain why and how the Daubert standard might be an issue in regard to the procedures mentioned above that were used to evaluate the defendant.

• Explain how you might prepare to testify if this was, or became, a Daubert challenge hearing.