Prolonged control produces a particular clinical picture: dependency, compliance, dissociation and difficulty naming what happened. None of that is a credibility problem, and the report says so.
Coercive control leaves a recognisable pattern. Naming it is often the part counsel most needs on the record.
The mechanisms of control as the client experienced them, described clinically rather than legally.
Why someone stayed, returned, or described the arrangement as their own choice.
Gaps, detachment and depersonalisation, which routinely present as an unreliable narrator when unexplained.
Accounts that change as safety increases. The direction of that change is itself clinically meaningful.
Sleep, concentration, trust and capacity to work or study now.
Where relevant, the psychological consequences of return, addressed separately.
Compliance under coercion is a finding, not a contradiction.
Survivors often describe having chosen what was in fact arranged for them.
Chosen against the referral question, administered and scored by the evaluator, and reported with what each measure was selected to answer.
Response validity can be especially important in forensic and immigration evaluations. With trafficking, under-reporting is at least as common as over-reporting, and the measures speak to both directions.
Sessions are paced deliberately. Pressing for a complete account in one sitting produces worse evidence, not more of it.
business days is the general timeline from the completed evaluation to the delivered report. An expedited timeline may be possible when a deadline is close.
The pre-referral conversation costs nothing. If an evaluation is not indicated for the case, you should hear that first.
