The judicial process imposes on family dispute a triangular shape, constituting two litigant parties that require a decision by a third one, the judge. Institutional discourse analysis, by its conception of discourse, subject, institution and transference, contributes to a better understanding of the psychology expert witnesses place at the scene set by the judicial proceedings, and for a more consistent discussion on the various factors involved in their actions. Through it, we can understand how the psychology expert witness is constituted in the triangulation configured in the proceedings and the importance of the analysis of procedural transference. The critical reading of the file is the first step of the analysis, helping to position the expert concerning the demand of the institution. The interview, which puts the expert in direct contact with the litigants, shows the exteriority relations that, despite demanded by the process, the psychological knowledge maintains with the law. Expectations and affects, as well as possible subjective effects of the relation with the expert, must be considered. The report is the moment when the psychology expert witness speaks in the proceedings, what has an interventional character. The expertise, as a judicial proof, is based on a certain will of truth, characteristic of the juridical institution and, at the same time, on the intention of the expert, as a supporting actor in the proceedings scene, to produce in it singular effects. It is important to recognize that what is produced in judicial expertise is not the Truth, but a relative truth that gives a possible meaning to the conflict configured in the judicial process.
Discourse analysis; Institutional discourse analysis; Forensic psychological examination; Forensic psychology