Psychiatric malpractice case analysis: striving for objectivity.
نویسندگان
چکیده
Forensic psychiatrists, acting as expert witnesses, must be able to perform objective analyses of psychiatric malpractice cases. Accurate malpractice case analysis requires careful attention to relevant legal concepts and consideration of potential biasing influences. If forensic psychiatrists are to avoid a reliance on "experts policing experts," individual forensic psychiatrists must be fully prepared to police themselves by recognizing and avoiding certain errors in malpractice case analysis. Any effort to improve objectivity must include a clear understanding of the confounding variables. In this article, the authors discuss some potential impediments to objective analysis of malpractice cases such as the use of the wrong standard, causation, hindsight bias, and contributory negligence.
منابع مشابه
Attorneys' pressures on the expert witness: early warning signs of endangered honesty, objectivity, and fair compensation.
While most attorneys practice ethically and treat their retained experts fairly, there are a few that do otherwise. The authors describe "early warning signs" of the likelihood that the attorneys attempting to retain the psychiatric expert witness may compromise the expert's honesty and striving for objectivity. Experts themselves may have certain vulnerabilities that interfere with their abili...
متن کاملCollaborative goal technology: theory & practice
Goal striving promotes hope and enhances motivation, which is important for psychosocial rehabilitation and recovery. The Collaborative Goal Technology (CGn is a new goal striving intervention that is used to support the autonomy and recovery processes of the person with a psychiatric disability. The CGT protocol and its utility are outlined. Theory and research from goal striving, motivation a...
متن کاملThe credible forensic psychiatric evaluation in multiple chemical sensitivity litigation.
The forensic psychiatrist must be able to perform a credible psychiatric evaluation and render a competent psychiatric opinion in hotly contested multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) litigation. Forensic psychiatrists are often requested to evaluate MCS claimants by third party payers, employers, lawyers, and government agencies regarding health care costs and disability payments, workers' compe...
متن کاملScientific Objectivity and Psychiatric Nosology
This paper challenges the traditional conception of objectivity in science by arguing that its singular focus on evidential relations and search for aperspectivalism renders it inadequate. Through an examination of psychiatric nosology, I argue that interesting and unique problems arise that challenge this conception of objectivity and that these challenges cannot be met by this account. Howeve...
متن کاملGuidelines for expert witness testimony in medical liability cases (S93-3). American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Medical Liability.
The American Academy of Pediatrics joins with other medical organizations in emphasizing the obligation of objectivity when its members respond to requests to serve as expert witnesses in the judicial systern. Regardless of the source of the request, such testimony ought to embody the relevant facts and the expert’s knowledge, experience, and best judgment regarding the case. At the same time, ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
دوره 34 2 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2006