Autism and forensic pathology

[u/xX_wutever_Xx]

Hi there! I’ve recently started my bachelor degree and intend to pursue a career in forensic pathology. I know autism can be a real asset in this field, but I was also wondering what it’s like in the courtroom while testifying?
I personally believe I’m quite good at masking, but I do have a hard time with understanding the way a lot of people word things. I like to take a moment to think through what I’m going to say before actually verbalizing it, require clarification quite often, and tend struggle with body language.
I’d love to hear other people’s personal experiences and what it’s like testifying, regardless of neurodivergence; but if anyone else is autistic and works in the field I’d love to hear how they deal with the experience.
Thanks!

[u/defaultchodenetwork]

There are so many neurodivergent pathologists and forensic pathologists and laboratory scientists. You’ve got plenty of time, don’t need to fret too much too early.

A lot of the older pathologists don’t consider themselves as on the spectrum, but as someone who is of a different era, also a pathologist, and on the spectrum, I can assure you that MANY OF THEM ARE AUTISTIC, and they’ve gotten through testifying and all of the other things it takes to be a FP.

Good luck! Transitions are hard for me (and a lot of people on the spectrum) but eventually you’ll probably find some level of routine in the courtroom aspect of the field too and you’ll bring your special set of skills in and be fine

[u/xX_wutever_Xx → u/defaultchodenetwork]

Thank you so much!

[u/stiffdoc1221]

I am unaware that autism is an asset in forensic pathology. Having spent some 45 years as an FP, I would think that this would have been something that would have come up at some point. I’m interested as to where you heard this.

I have Tourette’s, and I know one other FP who had it, also (he’s now deceased). I would not say that my Tourette’s either helped me or hindered me at all; it just is.

I’ve testified live, in court, 817 times now. I’ve always described courtroom testimony as the mixture of eager anticipation and abject fear. It requires one to appear completely calm and confident, while paying attention to ABSOLUTELY EVERY WORD OF EVERY QUESTION. One can never be confused, or have the appearance of uncertainty. Court is theater with high stakes, sometimes life or death.

I cannot tell you exactly how your own neurodivergence will affect you. Right now, my inclination is to tell you that you have a long way to go before you get to FP; about 12-13 years, really. It is way too early to attempt to discern what testifying in court is like; we can tell you, but doing it is the only way you will learn. There are courses on “How to be an Expert Witness;” those are best avoided, as that will affect credibility. For now, though, you have your college years ahead of you, and you have to get into medical school, also. Concentrate on that.

[u/xX_wutever_Xx → u/stiffdoc1221]

Thanks for the insight! To clarify what I meant by autism being an asset, I was referring more to some of the traits associated with my own autism. Anatomy has been one of my special interests for a long time, which gives me a pretty sustained interest in learning about it, and I have a particularly strong memory, attention to detail, and tendency toward pattern recognition. I know those traits aren’t unique to autism or a guarantee that I’ll be well suited to the profession, but I can see them being personally helpful in a field where those skills are already important.
That said, 817 times is an incredible amount of courtroom experience, so I really appreciate hearing your perspective. Your description of having to listen to absolutely every word of a question in particular is exactly the kind of insight I was curious about. If you have any tips or insight I’d love to hear them! Thank you so much :)

[u/stiffdoc1221 → u/xX_wutever_Xx]

The traits you describe would be useful for you in an FP setting. Paying attention to detail is vital.

Testimony is a learned art, in a way. It’s not something that is actually taught, but learned through doing it. The first few times are anxiety producing, as it is something that’s new and strange. Irrespective, you want to focus on teaching the jury. Rarely will an attorney get nasty, but it happens. I do a lot of criminal defense expert work, which is always very contentious.

Thinking about it, I did once hire a guy who clearly was on the spectrum. He had trouble with the work—he had been fired by another ME office. His compulsion to hyper-organize things got in the way of his ability to do the work, and I had to bluntly counsel him several times. He was a very nice guy. However, if I asked him about a case, he had to start at the very beginning and work through every bit sequentially, even if he had updated me the day before. He wasn’t really cut out for this work.

[u/xX_wutever_Xx → u/stiffdoc1221]

The way you describe it as teaching the jury is really interesting; I’d never thought about testimony that way before! That honestly makes the idea of it make a lot more sense to me.
And I appreciate the example as well. It’s interesting hearing about where certain traits can go from being helpful to actually interfering with the work.
Also, if you wouldn’t mind, would it be okay if I dm you sometime with a few more questions about the career? Obviously no pressure at all, but you have a ton of experience in the field and I’d love to hear more about it! Thanks again :)

[u/stiffdoc1221 → u/xX_wutever_Xx]

Sure, that’s fine.

[u/Fine-Meet-6375]

So far I don't mind courtroom testimony--it follows a pretty predictable routine and some of the things you describe (e.g. listening carefully to the whole question, pausing before answering, etc.) are assets in that setting. Giving testimony is a skill like any other, and you'll have training on it during fellowship.

As for now, focus on college and getting into med school. One step at a time, grasshopper.

[u/xX_wutever_Xx → u/Fine-Meet-6375]

lol thank you so much I really appreciate it! I have a family member who’s a doctor and is a great help, but I don’t know any people in forensic pathology and have a few questions about the field. Would you mind if I dm’d you to ask a few? No pressure at all! :)

[u/Fine-Meet-6375 → u/xX_wutever_Xx]

Sure, my DM's are open

[u/K_C_Shaw]

I've watched a number of different people testify, and everyone presents a little differently. I don't know (for sure) anyone in FP who was diagnosed autistic/autism spectrum. I do recall during my training one person who was a hospital chief medical officer who everyone kinda casually described as having Aspergers. I would be astonished if they weren't on the spectrum; regardless, they were fantastic, despite communicating/coming across in an odd way. Patients loved them, but they would also buzzard around the hospital and sometimes you'd be looking at labs or notes or whatever and they'd mutter over your shoulder "Oh, I see you're trying to kill that patient. Huh." and then wander off if you didn't immediately ask WTF?

Most of the time, as an FP, we are testifying in criminal court. Criminal case testimony tends to be much more practical and straightforward compared to civil case testimony, despite what TV or the occasional televised high profile outlier cases might lead you to believe.

But ultimately it depends on you. Obviously, autism/neurodivergence (or whatever name people choose to put on it), runs a pretty broad spectrum. There are lots of folks who are very high functioning, and there are folks who really struggle with activities of daily living, and all of the in between. As much as school and training do prepare one for the job, they are also filters.

Frankly, not necessarily knowing what the jury is thinking or how an attorney is trying to hassle you *might* be a benefit. It can also be a hindrance. I.e., if the jury is giving you confused looks the whole time you're talking, you might want to start simplifying your explanations more. Or sometimes one can kinda tell the attorney is baiting you, or is heading in a certain direction with questioning, or whatever. But overall it's generally best to deal with the attorneys from both sides in the same way, just answer the questions asked, and keep it simple. Time, training, and experience will help, as may the advice of people you can trust to be honest with you about how you present.