Emotional Damages Episode 7 Recap: Understanding PTSD in the Courtroom: Insights from Forensic Psychiatrist Dr. James Armontrout

/in ,

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is one of the most commonly cited psychiatric diagnoses in emotional damages litigation—but evaluating trauma in a forensic context requires far more than a diagnosis. In this episode of Emotional Damages, Dr. Ambarin Faizi speaks with forensic psychiatrist Dr. James Armontrout, program director of the Stanford Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship and trauma specialist at fpamed.

Drawing on years of experience treating veterans at the VA Palo Alto Trauma Recovery Program and evaluating claimants in multi-plaintiff cases, Dr. Armontrout discusses what attorneys need to know when working on PTSD-related claims. From assessing symptom validity to understanding treatment trajectories, this episode is a masterclass in trauma-informed forensic evaluation.

Key Insights From The Episode:

  1. The Clinical vs. Forensic Approach to PTSD: Dr. Armontrout explains the critical difference between treating someone clinically versus evaluating them forensically. While clinical care is geared toward healing and often accepts self-reports at face value, forensic evaluations demand objectivity, corroboration, and the ability to inform the trier of fact without becoming a patient advocate.
  2. Why PTSD Doesn’t Always Follow Trauma: Although many individuals are exposed to traumatic events, most do not develop PTSD. Dr. Armontrout emphasizes the importance of examining individual risk factors—like substance use, repeated trauma, and preexisting psychiatric conditions—when determining the likelihood and severity of PTSD in a legal claim.
  3. What “Good” Trauma Treatment Looks Like: The gold standard for PTSD treatment isn’t long-term talk therapy—it’s time-limited, trauma-focused protocols like Cognitive Processing Therapy (CPT) and Prolonged Exposure (PE). Attorneys evaluating damages should understand how these treatments work, what progress looks like, and how failure to improve may raise questions about causation or chronicity.
  4. The Role of Psychological Testing in Detecting Malingering: In PTSD litigation, malingering or exaggeration of symptoms can occur in 20–30% of cases. Dr. Armontrout describes how objective psychological testing can help identify symptom patterns that don’t align with genuine PTSD, while also differentiating other psychiatric diagnoses that may be present.
  5. Eggshell, Thin, and Crumbling Skull Plaintiffs: Attorneys often encounter plaintiffs with complex trauma histories. Dr. Armontrout unpacks how legal concepts like the “eggshell skull” apply to psychiatric damages and how forensic experts assess whether a new traumatic incident is a major cause, minor aggravator, or unrelated to current symptoms.

Understanding PTSD in the legal system requires more than a DSM diagnosis. Attorneys must collaborate with trauma-informed experts who can interpret psychiatric evidence, assess causation, and deliver clear, defensible opinions that hold up under scrutiny.

Listen to the full episode now and subscribe to Emotional Damages on your preferred platform.

Need support for an ongoing or upcoming case?

Fpamed’s multidisciplinary team of psychiatrists and psychologists brings deep experience in PTSD-related litigation.

Reach out to email hidden; JavaScript is required to consult with an expert.

Listen, subscribe. and leave a review on:
Spotify | Apple Podcasts | Wherever You Get Your Podcast Fix

Need support for an ongoing or upcoming case? fpamed’s team of forensic psychiatrists and psychologists is here to help. Reach out to email hidden; JavaScript is required today for expert case support.