Comprehensive Psychiatric Examination

Following are excerpts from the examination documentation.

Date of Birth : 08/25/72

Date of IME : 09/07/05

Sources of Information

1. Deposition testimony
2. Affidavit of xxx xxxx xxxx, xxxx xxxxx, xxxx xxxxxxxx
3. Medical records of Dr. xxxxx
4. Medical records of xxxx xxxxxx, Ph.D.
5. Medical records of xxxxx xxxxxx, Ph.D.
6. Medical records of xxxx xxxxxx, Ph.D.
7. Complaint
8. Diary of events created by Ms. xxxx xxxxx, 3/26/04
9. xxxx xxxx position statement to the EEOC

Confidentiality

xxxx xxxxxx was informed that the purpose of the evaluation was to provide a comprehensive psychiatric examination report to Ms xxxxx x xxxx, the attorney for xxx xxxxxxx. Xxxxxxx xxxxxx understood that information obtained during our meeting and from review of records would be provided to Ms. xxxxxs and therefore was not confidential. Xxxx xxxx was informed that doctor-patient confidentiality did not exist for this examination or for any testing that might be involved in this examination. Xxxx xxxx expressed an understanding of this and agreed, under these circumstances, to proceed with the examination.

Qualifications of the Examiner

The consultant is a licensed physician in the State of Florida, and is a diplomate of the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, and also a diplomate of the American Board of Forensic Medicine and diplomate of the American Board of Disability Analysts.

Position Statement of xxx xxxxx to the EEOC 8/9/04.

Position Statement reviewed.

"The Respondent did not harass the Charging Party on the basis of her sex..." This statement documents a consensual relationship between Ms. xxxxy and Mr. xxx.

This statement documents performance problems regarding Ms. xs employment at xxx xxxxxxx. M. rxxxxxxx underwent a polygraph examination. "The exam focused on the consensual nature of Captain xxxxxs' relationship with the Charging Party. After conducting the exam, the interviewer analyzed the data and concluded that Captain xxxxxs did not show any signs of deceptiveness in his answers."

Affidavit review of xxxx xxxx, xxxxx xxxxx and xxxx xxxxxx :

Review of the affidavits document a consensual relationship between Mr. xxxx and Ms. xxxxx. They also document poor work performance; including Ms. xxxxy was spending excessive time on personal calls and had attendance problems.

Review of Medical Records and Depositions

I have reviewed all the medical records and depositions that I received. A summary of data that is relevant to Ms. xxxx xxxxxx's psychiatric condition and legal case was provided.

DSM-4-TR Psychiatric Diagnosis

• Axis 1: Anxiety Disorder NOS, by history, currently in full remission
• Axis 2: deferred
• Axis 3: none
• Axis 4: Problems related to interaction with the legal system, economic problems
• Axis 5: Current Global assessment of functioning: 90
• Highest Past Year Global assessment of functioning: 90

Summary / Impressions

xxxx xxxxx is a 34 year old, Caucasian, divorced female who was evaluated for an Independent Psychiatric Examination. She is suing her previous employer, xxx xxxxxxx alleging sexual harassment. She states that she developed emotional problems as a consequence of this alleged harassment. I was asked to evaluate Ms. xxxxxxy, acting as a consultant for the defense in the case, xxxxx vs. xx xxxx Agency, LLC.

xxxx xxxxx was cooperative with the examination. She stated that she did not know why she was being seen for a psychiatric examination since she was now feeling fine. She stated that her emotional problems occurred during the time she was working for xx xxxxx.

In this summary, this consultant provided information believed to be relevant to the psychiatric issues in this case.

1. xxxxx xxxx does not currently have symptoms consistent with any psychiatric disorder. Previous symptoms are currently in remission. Evidence supportive of remission include the lack of active symptoms noted by Ms. xxxxx when asked a series of questions during the diagnostic interview. In addition, her mental status examination was normal. The Hamilton Depression Scale is consistent with remission. Her lack of psychiatric treatment is also supportive of remission. In addition, her current activities which include full time employment and taking responsibility for household and family activities are also supportive of remission.

Since her previous psychiatric condition is in remission, she does not need any psychiatric treatment.

Since her previous psychiatric condition is in remission, there is no evidence supporting long term psychiatric or psychological negative consequences regarding her allegations of sexual harassment.

2. While I do not find evidence supporting a diagnosis of Malingering, there is significant objective evidence that supports that xxxx xxxxx exaggerates her psychological symptoms. This evidence includes MMPI-2 results that include validity scale scores consistent with symptom exaggeration. In addition, subjective psychometric testing, such as the Beck Depression Inventory and the Sheehan Patient Rated Anxiety Scale document more severe psychological symptoms when compared to her history, mental status examination and the Hamilton Depression Scale.

One explanation for this symptom exaggeration is that xxxxx xxxxx documents symptoms which she believes may benefit her in her lawsuit against xx xxxxx. This behavior would be consistent with a phenomenon known as secondary gain.

Since there is current objective evidence of symptom exaggeration, the accuracy of information which Ms. xx xxxy provided to previous therapists must be questioned. While Ms. xxxx told me that Dr. xxxxx recommended that she contact the EEOC regarding her allegations of sexual harassment, review of the treatment records from Dr. xxxxx document that Ms. xxxxxx had already obtained an attorney and was filing her case with the EEOC prior to her initial evaluation by Dr. xxxxxxx. It is possible that xxxx xxxxxxx exaggerated her psychological symptoms when she saw Dr. xxxx and Dr. xxxxl because of secondary gain issues involved with her sexual harassment allegations.

3. There is documented evidence in the medical records from Drs. xxxxx, xxxxx and xxxxxl that xxxxxx xxxxx complained of depressive and anxiety symptoms during the time period she alleges sexual harassment. It is possible that the stress related to this alleged harassment is related to the onset of these subjective depressive and anxiety symptoms. During the same time period, xxxxx xxxxxx complained of other stressful circumstances including financial stressors, stressors associated with being a single mother and stressors related to her relationship with the father of her youngest daughter. These stressors may also have played a role in the onset of her subjective depressive and anxiety symptoms. There is no scientifically valid way to determine which stressor (and to what degree) caused or influenced her psychiatric symptoms during the time period she alleges sexual harassment.

4. In this case, Ms. xxxxxx alleges sexual harassment by Mr. xxxx. Mr. Bxxxxxxx and xx xxxxx deny these allegations. During this psychiatric examination, I am not able to determine if Ms. xxxx xxxxxx allegations are or are not accurate. However, what I am able to determine during this psychiatric examination is that Ms. xxxxx xxxxxx was willing to provide misinformation in regards to a history of legal consequences of alcohol use and if she had any history of abuse. Ms. xxxxxy was arrested a few months ago for driving under the influence. Even though I asked her several times about any DUI or problems associated with alcohol use, she denied any problems. She also denied any history of physical or emotional abuse in her past. Medical records and her deposition document abuse by her ex-husband. It is possible that Ms xxxxxy provided misinformation because she did not feel the accurate answers were in the best interest of her lawsuit.

In summary, based on the psychiatric examination, objective and subjective testing and review of legal documentation and medical records it is my opinion that :

1. Based on review of medical records, xxxxxx xxxxx developed depressive and anxiety symptoms. The cause of these symptoms cannot be determined by any valid scientific method.
2. Ms. xxxxxxx xxxxx's currently shows no signs of any psychiatric illness.
3. There are no long term negative psychiatric consequences secondary to her allegations of sexual harassment while working for xx xxxx.

I declare that the information contained in this report and its attachments, if any, is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, except as to information that I have indicated I have received from others. As to that information, I declare that the information accurately describes the information provided to me and, except as noted herein, that I believe it to be true.

I declare that the diagnosis and impressions in the IME are all within a reasonable degree of medical certainty.

To see the resume of the expert associated with this case study, see the link below.