At times psychiatrists who testify as expert witnesses have been perceived in the popular, legal, and medical literature as either deficient in knowledge or to have knowingly behaved in an unethical manner to advance the cause of the party who hired them. The American Psychiatric Association Council on Psychiatry and Law appointed a task force to review the question of expert testimony and the development of standards to guide the peer review process. This article discusses some of the topics for consideration by the task force: (1) voluntary versus mandatory peer review; (2) general issues in the voluntary peer review process; (3) performance areas to be reviewed; (4) who should serve as peer reviewers; (5) conflict of interest and confidentiality; (6) sponsors; (7) training; (8) the process; and (9) issues for mandatory peer review. Experience with peer review of expert psychiatric testimony indicates that the greatest barrier to peer review is professional acceptance of the process. Note, references, appendixes