The overriding principle justifying New York court decisions in favor of the presence of counsel at court-ordered psychiatric examinations has been preservation of the principles of the adversarial system under which the courts operate. Enhancing the value of the cross-examination of the expert witness is cited most often as the rationale for the decisions in these cases. In some cases, the courts have interpreted statutes guaranteeing the right to counsel in the broadest sense to mean representation at every stage of litigation, including the psychiatric examination. This should not mean, however, that counsel may act adversarially in the context of psychiatric examinations. This would turn the psychiatric interview into a courtroom without benefit of an impartial judge. Counsel should be restricted to the role of an observer in psychiatric examinations. 28 references.