Lynn Fainsilber Katz

Keith Bloomfield _{on Google}

Feb 28th, 2018

Dr. Katz works in complicity with attorneys. That is: When a custody case happens in a courtroom, attorneys volunteer their own experts (people whom they are confident will help them win their case), and the judge grants one party or the other the privilege of bringing in their affiliated expert.
Katz is one such evaluator. In the absence of any obvious crime, Dr. Katz will bias her findings in favor of the attorney who brought her the business. It's not about the child, it's about the professional favors.
And quite a lucrative business it is. On her website, her rate is less than $200. However, when you are locked in by court order, her rate jumps to $400+. Her statement of work alludes to the fate you might suffer should you attempt to go pro se and not pay her the rate she has assigned to you.
To justify this rate, she relies on her extensive list of accreditations, and includes her 20-some page CV in her reports. In it are papers published, grants received, etc. etc. It is obvious that her pursuits are focused towards quantity over quality, and this becomes evident when her unavailability stretches your evaluation across several years (mine took over 2).
Because of the delays she brought upon herself by demanding all evaluations occur with her chosen providers and taking on too much additional work; she informed me she had to essentially redo my case. I found myself reminding her and correcting her notes almost entirely while paying her to do so. At one point, I had to forward her her own email quoting a retainer because she had lost it. I had to do the same to prove my recollection of events were more accurate than her notes. I spent a considerable amount of time dredging up information she had lost about her business while paying her to put the pieces back together as best she could.
Regarding her notes: During a session, she scrawls away feverishly on a notepad, regularly stopping her patients so she can catch up. Later she transcribes her notes into a final report. This process results in a relatively high error rate. Why not simply record the entire session on audio, then play it back later to ensure nothing was missed? Her current process is inefficient, costly, and inaccurate.
I take feedback seriously, have been recognized as a person who aspires to better himself, and don't appreciate being treated like a criminal. I don't know how Dr. Katz treats patients who come to her voluntarily, but in our sessions I found her at times to be combative, hostile, and emotional. Instead of seeking to gain perspective, she accumulates touch points of negativity to ultimately add to her scathing report. In other words: She readily displays the same behavior she condemns. To pick apart two people in the midst of a dispute is a profitable cheap shot. To follow up with punishment for opposing counsel while denying evidence at hand is unethical.
Regarding her recommendations: Just as an attorney recommended and judge assigned Dr. Katz, she has makes her own appointments of therapists and coordinators. Online reviews of her recommendations reveal similar skepticism regarding integrity. When I requested a similar expert located closer to my home, she denied the request citing a different specialization. When I then proposed another expert meeting her required specialization, she denied it again; this time providing no reason whatsoever. This leads me to assume she has shady relationships with other professionals that she is unwilling to share openly. Given the haphazard quality of her work, what reason is there to believe she makes sound recommendations?
In my opinion: Dr. Katz does not act in the best interest of the child when she is brought into a case by an attorney representing one side of a dispute. When it benefits her party in a case, she makes recommendations against children that ultimately reduce their protections and safety. She should be ashamed of herself for putting prestige and profit over ethics, and for eliminating the prospects of others in her field for reasons undisclosed.