A significant problem for forensic evaluations is the large number of clients who respond in a defensive manner. The present study examined defensive responding patterns on two self-report measures, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2) and the Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAP). Subjects were child welfare clients undergoing a parental capacity evaluation. It was hypothesized that subjects would be less likely to attempt to portray themselves in an unrealistically positive manner (fake good) on the MMPI-2 than the CAP since the CAP items are more concerned with matters of child abuse and the MMPI-2 questions are primarily focused on Axis I and II diagnoses. It was further hypothesized that respondents who were court ordered would have higher faking good scores on both instruments. Results found the MMPI-2 had lower faking good scores compared with the CAP. No significant differences were found for any of the validity measures for court ordered status. Statistically significant patterns were found for court ordered status on some of the MMPI-2\u27s clinical scales. Implications for the use of both instruments in forensic evaluations are discussed
