The Millon™ Clinical Multiaxial Inventory Testing The Use And Validity Of The MCMI-III™ In Court Cases

By Eric Marcy |   Feb. 4, 2016

The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (“MCMI-III”™) is a popular assessment tool used by clinical psychologists, that has been in use since approximately 1977. This instrument has been the subject of many articles and books.[1] The theoretical basis derives from Millon’s theory of personality development, personality types, and personality disorders. The instrument relies on 175 “self-report” true false questions, which are dependent upon a subject’s self awareness and providing accurate responses to the questions. [2] Similar to other testing instruments the Millon attempts to build in validity scales to account for any misrepresentation of symptoms and attempts to “detect” "invalid profiles.”[3] The MCMI-III Manual itself specifically acknowledges “limitations and qualifications” regarding its use. The data derives from clinical sampling and “are applicable only to individuals who evidence problematic emotional and interpersonal symptoms or who are undergoing professional psychotherapy or a psycho diagnostic evaluation” and “the samples employed for such purposes are best drawn only from comparable clinical populations.” (T. Millon, R. Davis, P. Millon, , MCMI-III Manual, 2nd ed. (1997), at p. 6.[4] It “is not a general personality instrument to be used with normal populations or for purposes other than diagnostic screening or clinical assessment.”[5] Similar to the MMPI-2, the MCMI-III results may generate computer generated report, the manual itself cautions that “reading a computerized report is no substitute for clinical judgment. Only those trained in the limits of psychological tests are qualified to interpret them."[6] Read More

Topics : Criminal Defense, Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS), Scientific Evidence, Criminal Law, Psychological Test, discovery, Eric Marcy, Parole, Domestic Violence, Division of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP), Evidence, Healthcare, experts | 0 Comments Read More


By Eric Marcy |   Sep. 11, 2015


Society’s interest in the protection of children is a significant and legitimate interest of the State. That interest still has to be balanced with the constitutional rights of those being investigated by child welfare agencies.

The Division of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP), formerly known as the Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) has been granted broad powers both from State statute and the New Jersey Administrative Code. The question becomes whether agents of the State acting under those powers, exceed their scope, and violate the due process rights of those parents and families that they are meant to protect? The CPP’s investigatory broad power flows from the structure of statutes and administrative code. The overzealous application of such power, even if intended in good faith, can be intrusive and damaging to the family unit the laws were intended to protect.

Read More

Topics : Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS), Constitutional Rights, Criminal Law, Due Process, Domestic Violence, Division of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP), Family | 0 Comments Read More

Court issues opinion on admissibility of testimony given at domestic violence hearings

By Darren M. Gelber |   Aug. 3, 2012

In New Jersey, domestic violence incidents can result in two separate and different types of court cases. A recent opinion from the Superior Court, Appellate Division, has helped to explain how these two separate but parallel court proceedings can sometimes interact with each other.

Read More

Topics : Right to Remain Silent, Constitutional Rights, Domestic Violence | 1 Comment Read More

    All Blog Posts

    Subscribe to Email Updates

    Featured Blogger

    Eric Marcy

    Eric Marcy

    Click Here to Read My Latest Blog Post


    see all