The saga surrounding Judge Pauline Newman involves a pro bono assessment by Dr. Aaron G. Filler, confirming her fitness to serve. However, the Judicial Council's Special Committee claimed substantial errors in Filler's report, with experts arguing that his methodology lacks comprehensive clinical assessment standards. Filler rebukes these critiques, asserting that regulatory approval from the FDA does not dictate clinical practices in neuroscience. The ongoing disputes highlight tensions in the judicial evaluations and the challenge of establishing authority in assessing cognitive impairments.
The Judicial Council has been dragging out this process unlawfully, and without any evidentiary basis, keeping Judge Newman off the bench.
Of course, there is also no FDA approval of the use of neuropsychology or neuroradiology or neurology to assess dementia.
Collection
[
|
...
]