40 A practical guide to the Istanbul Protocol – for psychologists If the survivor has symptom levels consistent with one or more DSM IV or ICD 10 psychiatric diagnoses, the diagnosis should be stated. If not, the consistency between the psychological findings and the history of the individual should be evaluated as a whole and stated in the report (Istanbul Protocol, § 289). (See chapter VI in the Istanbul Protocol.) III. WHAT TO DO IF THERE ARE INCONSISTENCIES IN THE STORY AND/OR IF THE INTERVIEWER/CLINICIAN SUSPECTS FABRICATION? Be aware that inconsistencies do not necessarily mean that an allegation is false (Giffard, 2000), instead, inconsistencies might indicate precisely the opposite. Inconsistencies in a torture victim’s story may arise from any or all of the above-mentioned factors leading to difficulties in recalling and recounting the story (see Part B. “VIII. Factors leading to inconsistencies and difficulties in recalling and recounting the story of torture” in this guide). Interpreting inconsistencies immediately as representing malingering and false allegations may introduce errors in the evaluation, which might have serious consequences for the person being evaluated. • If possible, the investigator should ask for further clarification, (Giffard, 2000). It is important to recognize that some people may falsely allege torture for a range of reasons, and that others may exaggerate a relatively minor experience for personal or political gains. The investigator must always be aware of these possibilities and try to identify potential reasons for exaggeration or fabrication. Nevertheless, the clinician should also keep in mind that such fabrication requires a detailed knowledge about trauma-related symptoms that individuals rarely possess. • Additional interviews should be scheduled to clarify inconsistencies in the report. Family or friends may be able to corroborate details of the history • If the clinician conducts additional examinations and still suspects fabrication, he/she should refer the individual to another clinician and ask for the colleague’s opinion • The suspicion of fabrication should be documented with the opinion of two clinicians. If there are inconsistencies in the story: (See § 143, § 144, § 253 and § 290 in the Istanbul Protocol.) If this is not possible, the clinician should look for other evidence that supports or refutes the story. A network of consistent supporting details can corroborate and clarify the person’s story. Although the individual may not be able to provide the details desired by the investigator such as dates, times, frequencies, exact identities of perpetrators, overall themes of the traumatic events and torture will emerge and stand up over time. If the interviewer/clinician still suspects fabrication: