Zeitschrift für ärztliche Fortbildung
-
Z Arztl Fortbild (Jena) · Nov 1996
[Development of expert assessment in the malpractice lawsuit from the viewpoint of the judge].
The expert testimony in medical malpractice suits is being criticized until today. The most important objection: The medical experts do not obey their duty to be impartial; they are reluctant to testify against their colleagues regardless of the merits of the plaintiffs' case. But owing to ignorance they often violate further duties they have to comply with as experts, too. ⋯ But judges are also responsible for the situation: Not in all cases they do pay enough attention to the selection, instruction and questioning of the medical expert. Many mistakes made in the field of expert testimony meanwhile are recognized and eliminated. Nevertheless seminars for the further instruction of physicians and lawyers are urgently necessary in order to improve the medical expert testimony.
-
Z Arztl Fortbild (Jena) · Nov 1996
[Medical expert assessment in civil and criminal law--stand for evaluating medical expert assessment].
The standard for the assessment of the medical expert opinion is defined by the high demands expected from the judgement of a high court: Objectiveness, solid knowledge, self-criticism, in contestability in diction and firmness in the argumentation. From the legal point of view, the knowledge of the medical expert witness has to clearly go beyond the knowledge of his profession. ⋯ It is necessary for a physician as an expert witness to have basic knowledge about the evidence law and the medical liability process. On the other hand, judges and lawyers should basically know the medical way of thinking.