This document discusses a case, Pollizzi v. Get-a-Life Insurance Company, in which an insurance company is refusing to pay life insurance death benefits for an 8-year-old child who died of a drug overdose. The insurance company claims the death was a suicide, which is not covered. An expert witness conducted a psychological autopsy to determine if the child had the capacity to commit suicide. The document analyzes whether psychological autopsies meet the Frye standard for reliability and admissibility in court. It discusses studies on both sides and concludes that while psychological autopsies are generally accepted, their reliability is questionable, so they should not be admitted in this case.

1. NICOLE POLLIZZI
V.
GET-A-LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY
James Maxwell Koffler
Advanced Trial Techniques
Professor Biancavilla
April 14, 2012

2. The Issue: Pollizzi v. Get-a-Life Ins. Co.
(N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2012)
 Plaintiff is the mother of an eight-year-old child who died from an
overdose on the drug Zoloft.
 Defendant, insurance company, is refusing to pay the death benefits
from a life insurance policy claiming that they need not pay the
death benefit because losses resulting from suicide are not covered.
 If the fact finder determines that the child did commit suicide the
defendant will not have to pay out death benefits.
 Question Presented: The admissibility of an
expert opinion based on a psychological
autopsy that the eight-year-old child had the
capacity to commit suicide.

3. Child Suicide:
Why We Need An Expert Witness
 “[An expert] opinion is proper when it would help to clarify an issue calling for
professional or technical knowledge, possessed by the expert and beyond the ken
of the typical juror.” People v. Taylor, 75 N.Y.2d 277, 288 (1990).
 Suicide- Death caused by self-directed injurious behavior with any intent to die as
a result of the behavior. CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, SELF-
DIRECTED VIOLENCE SURVEILLANCE: UNIFORM DEFINITION AND RECOMMENDED
DATA ELEMENTS 23 (2011).
 “A [strong] presumption against suicide is applicable in litigation under insurance
contracts” Green v. William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 12 N.Y.3d 342, 342, 346-47
(2009).
 Plaintiff argues “A general consensus is that most children understand the
irrevocable result of suicide by the age of 10” and not before. Freuchen, infra, at 2.
 Defense argues that children under ten do have the capacity to commit suicide if
they are “physically and cognitively precocious” and that a psychological autopsy
is relevant to that determination. Pelkonen, & Marttunen, infra, at 245.

4. Studies and Articles Define What A
Psychological Autopsy Is.
 Developed by Edwin S. Schneidman & Norman L. Farberow in 1963.
 “[A] [p]sychological autopsy is a relatively unstructured clinical technique in which a mental
health professional attempts to discern the mental state of a deceased person at some previous
point in time.” James R. P. Ogloff & Randy K. Otto, Psychological Autopsy: Clinical and
Legal Perspectives, 37 ST. LOUIS L.J. 607, 608 (1993).
 “[T]he psychological autopsy seeks to make a reasonable determination of what was in the
mind of the decedent vis-à-vis his or her own death.” Schneidman, The Psychological
Autopsy, AM. PSYCHOLOGIST, Jan. 1994, at 75.
 Psychological autopsies are normally conducted by interviewing persons who knew the
deceased, as well as reviewing hospital records, police reports, coroner reports, doctor
notes, and laboratory reports concerning the decedent along with their personal writings and
effects.
 Select Studies: Anne Freuchen et al., Differences Between Children and Adolescents who
Commit Suicide and Their Peers: A Psychological Autopsy of Suicide Victims Compared to
Accident Victims and a Community Sample, CHILD & ADOLESCENT PSYCHIATRY &MENTAL
HEALTH, Vol. 6 (2012); Mirijami Pelkonen & Mauri Marittunen, Child and Adolescent
Suicide: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Approaches to Prevention, 5 PEDIATRIC DRUGS 243
(2003); Bruce W. Ebert, Guide to Conducting a Psychological Autopsy, 18 PROF. PSYCHOL.:
RES. & PRAC. 52 (1987).

5. Ronald W. Maris, Ph.D.
 Education
 1968-69 Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine (Post-Doctoral Fellow in Psychiatry)
 1965-66 Los Angeles Suicide Prevention Center (Trainee in Suicidology)
 1961-65 University of Illinois (Urbana), Ph.D. (Social-Psychology)
 Certification
 Forensic Suicidologist
 Affiliations
 Professor Emeritus University of South Carolina
 Adjunct Professor University of South Carolina School of Medicine
 Publications
 ALAN L. BERMAN, RONALD W. MARIS & MORTON M. SILVERMAN, COMPREHENSIVE TEXTBOOK ON
SUICIDOLOGY (2000)
 THE BIOLOGY OF SUICIDE (1986) (editor)
 Past Expert Witness Experience- 1977-2011 (51% Plaintiff- 46% Defendant)
 Psychological autopsy accepted in Smith v. Pfizer, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118006 (D. Mass. 2009)
 Consulted in 230 cases; testified in 34 states

6. The Frye/Wesley Standard
 A method “must be sufficiently established to have
gained general acceptance in the particular field in
which it belongs.” Frye v. United States, 293 F.
1013, 1014 (D.C. Cir. 1923) (emphasis added).
 “[T]he particular procedure … must be generally
accepted as reliable.” People v. Wesley, 83 N.Y.2d
417, 423 (1994) (emphasis added).
 Counting the scientists standard. See id. at 439
(Kaye, C.J., concurring).

7. The Defense’s Side: “Counting Scientists”: Factors Trending
Toward Psychological Autopsies Having General Acceptance
in the Mental Health Field.
 Relied upon to gather statistics on child suicide in some psychological circles.
 Relied upon to identify risk-factors for child suicide. Keilly & Mann, Validity of
DSM-III-R Diagnosis by Psychological Autopsy: A Comparison with Clinician
Ante-mortem Diagnosis, 94 ACTA PSYCHIACTRICA SCANDINAVIA, 337 (1996)
(attempting to prove the validity of this method for identifying risk factors of
suicide not correct cause of death).
 Am. Ass’n of Suicidology offers a two-day psychological autopsy certification
program.
 See, e.g., Anne Freuchen et al., Differences Between Children and Adolescents who
Commit Suicide and Their Peers: A Psychological Autopsy of Suicide Victims
Compared to Accident Victims and a Community Sample, CHILD & ADOLESCENT
PSYCHIATRY &MENTAL HEALTH, Vol. 6 (2012); Mirijami Pelkonen & Mauri
Marittunen, Child and Adolescent Suicide: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and
Approaches to Prevention, 5 PEDIATRIC DRUGS 243 (2003); Bruce W. Ebert, Guide
to Conducting a Psychological Autopsy, 18 PROF. PSYCHOL.: RES. & PRAC. 52
(1987).

8. What Does the Mental Health Community Think About
Child Suicide—Statistically Speaking
For Recognizing Suicide Under Against Recognizing Suicide
the Age of 10 Under the Age of 10
 According to statistics  The Centers for Disease
retrieved from a database Control, and the National
maintained by the Centers for Institute of Mental Health do
Disease Control, 35 children not report statistics on
ranging from 7-9 years of age children under the age of ten
committed suicide in the committing suicide.
years 1999-2007.  While the American Academy
 Child and Adolescent Suicide of Suicidology does keep
Deaths in New Mexico, 1990- rates on suicides by 5-14 year
94, Vol. 21 CRISIS, at 36 olds it does not differentiate
(2000) (identifying a crude between 5-9 and 10-14.
suicide rate for ages 5-9).

9. The Plaintiff’s Side: “Counting Scientists”: Factors Trending
Against Psychological Autopsies Having General Acceptance
of Reliability in the Mental Health Field.
 Bias- interviewees wish to conceal important facts.
 Incompleteness of Information
 No Standard Methodology for Performing the Procedure (unlike Empirical
Criteria for the Determination of a Suicide)
 Subject is Deceased- no way to verify determination of manner of death.
 While there is general acceptance that psychological autopsies are a
method of determining causes of death when there is equivocation, it is not
generally accepted that the method is reliable.
 See, e.g., Pelkonen & Marttunen, supra, at 245; Ogloff & Otto, supra, at
645; Elizabeth Biffl, Note, 24 AM. J. CRIM. L. 123 (1996) (noting the lack
of reliability and validity as a bar to the courtroom); James
Selkin, Psychological Autopsy: Scientific Psychohistory or Clinical
Intuition, AM. PSYCHOLOGIST, Jan. 1994, at 74; Ebert, supra, at 52-56.

10. Selected Judicial Rulings on
Psychological Autopsies
 “Although federal courts use the Daubert test instead of the Frye standard … it is instructive to
examine [those authorities]for purposes of discussion of accepted scientific methodology.” Parker v.
Mobil Oil, Corp., 793 N.Y.S.2d 434, 437 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005).
 “[T]here is substantial reason to doubt the reliability of suicidal profiles if they are to be used to
declare unequivocally that a subject's death was self-inflicted.” State v. Guthrie, 627 N.W.2d
401, 417-18 (S.D. 2001) (deeming the admission of an expert opinion of a doctor who performed a
psychological autopsy as an abuse of discretion due to reliability concerns).
 “Some courts have apparently permitted the introduction of psychological autopsy evidence for the
purpose of determining whether an individual's death was the result of suicide, but the opinions of
these courts do not discuss the reliability of the proffered evidence. “ Fanning v. Sitton Motor
Lines, Inc., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116809, *29 n. 13 (D. Kan. 2010) (emphasis added).
 Jackson v. State, 553 So.2d 719 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989) (admitting a psychological autopsy to establish
child abuse as the cause of a seventeen-year-old girl’s suicide in a criminal prosecution for said
abuse).
 Bartram v. State, 364 A.2d 1119 (Md. Ct. App. 1976) (admitting the opinion of an expert witness
who conducted a psychological autopsy to present the suicide of the victim as a defense to a murder
charge).
 Giles v. Wyeth, Inc., 500 F. Supp. 1048, 1061 (S.D. Ill. 2007) (finding in a litigation about whether
the drug Effexor caused the suicide of the decedent that a psychological autopsy is a “generally
accepted methodology for determining the cause of a suicide”).

11. Conclusion: Psychological
Autopsies Fails Frye Standard
 The psychological autopsy should be deemed
inadmissible under the Frye standard in the present
case because although it is a generally accepted
method it is not one that is reliable. This is due to a
high risk of incomplete and/or biased information
that can be present, and more importantly the lack
of significant standards and guidelines for
performing the psychological autopsy.
 Unlike Caesar’s wife the reliability of
psychological autopsies are not above reproach.