Mark Abrams's Online Review Report Card

Excellent; very thorough and detail oriented, focused on conclusions based directly on parties being evaluated rather than influenced by obviously biased collateral contacts and/or melodramatic ‘acting’. Dr. Abrams correctly placed emphasis on direct observations and facts. Spiteful reviews of Dr. Abrams are blatant blowback from parties concluded to be less fit for custody, as an example, surely for very good reason and obvious through clinical evaluation or otherwise.

Agree with other review... he makes up his mind before he does an evaluation. He is misleading in his reporting. He will leave out information from other professionals if it doesn’t support his case. He picks and chooses what to include to support his case. Did other work while he was charging me, overcharges and didn’t get his extra fees approved by the court per the stipulation, and cancelled on me twice. During one session, after I came back from lunch break, I saw a zip lock baggie on his desk which looked like it contained marijuana - no doubt in my mind it was what it looked like.

Unprofessional, inappropriate, and conducted his “evaluations” while taking personal phone calls including one from his landscaper. He was cold and brash and purposely tried to be intimidating. He conducts his interviews adjacent to his martial arts studio where he has dozens of swords and weapons displayed. He looked me up and down upon each visit and gave off a predatory vibe. He made my children uncomfortable and asked them leading questions. He made ridiculous, false and unsubstantiated assumptions about me and my family and wrote a report that was not steeped in an ounce of reality. Just goes to show that a doctorate and “decades of experience” do not translate to being honest or having integrity. What a vile human being. He should be ashamed of what he claims is expertise. Forensic psychology is a farse.

Dr. Abrams is very good at what he does. He conducted an extremely thorough forensic exam and interviewed all relevant parties. I would describe him as tough but fair. He can quickly see when somebody is not telling him the truth. He asks probing questions over multiple sessions, and the resulting report and conclusion were comprehensive and well thought out.

Terrible forensic report. His conclusion didn't match his findings. He is biased. And will make up his mind before doing his job. Avoid him.