Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

[Expert testimony in malpractice suits]

E Deutsch1

  • 1Universität Göttingen, Juristisches Seminar.

Zeitschrift Fur Arztliche Fortbildung
|November 1, 1995
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Physicians may be required to provide expert witness opinions in legal cases. These opinions must focus on medical facts, not legal conclusions, to avoid liability for incorrect assessments.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Phase I trial of everolimus in combination with thoracic radiotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer.

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology·2015
Same author

Implementation of the global risk analysis in pulsed-dose rate brachytherapy: methods and results.

Cancer radiotherapie : journal de la Societe francaise de radiotherapie oncologique·2015
Same author

Focal or combined modality for the management of brain metastasis: did high tech radiotherapy superseded drug-radiotherapy combination?

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology·2014
Same author

Radiosensitization by a novel Bcl-2 and Bcl-XL inhibitor S44563 in small-cell lung cancer.

Cell death & disease·2014
Same author

[Stereotactic body radiation therapy in the management of liver tumours].

Cancer radiotherapie : journal de la Societe francaise de radiotherapie oncologique·2014
Same author

The use of theranostic gadolinium-based nanoprobes to improve radiotherapy efficacy.

The British journal of radiology·2014
Same journal

[The success of medical continuing education. Methods of evaluation--possibilities, limits and future developments].

Zeitschrift fur arztliche Fortbildung·1997
Same journal

[General practice quality circles in the large city. Participation by Hamburg general physicians].

Zeitschrift fur arztliche Fortbildung·1997
Same journal

[Healthy life style. Perspectives of prevention in modern society].

Zeitschrift fur arztliche Fortbildung·1997
Same journal

[Contents of a "basic psychosomatic management" curriculum. Results of a 4-year concomitant evaluation].

Zeitschrift fur arztliche Fortbildung·1997
Same journal

[Implants in urology].

Zeitschrift fur arztliche Fortbildung·1997
Same journal

[Organ-specific nodular pulmonary amyloidosis of the A lambda type in Sjogren syndrome].

Zeitschrift fur arztliche Fortbildung·1997
See all related articles

Area of Science:

  • Medical Law
  • Forensic Medicine
  • Professional Ethics

Context:

  • Physicians have a professional right and sometimes a legal duty to provide expert opinions.
  • Court-appointed expert witnesses operate under specific legal statutes (e.g., sec. 407 ZPO, 75 StPO).
  • Expert witnesses possess testimonial privileges similar to other witnesses.

Purpose:

  • To clarify the scope and limitations of physician expert witness testimony.
  • To define the content requirements for medical expert opinions.
  • To outline potential consequences of providing inaccurate expert opinions.

Summary:

  • Expert opinions must detail the medical expert's field, standards, and necessity of treatment steps.
  • Physicians acting as expert witnesses should not address legal questions or determine negligence.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Providing a culpable incorrect expert opinion can lead to legal liability.

    • Impact:

    • Enhances understanding of physician responsibilities in legal proceedings.
    • Promotes accurate and ethically sound medical expert reporting.
    • Reduces ambiguity regarding physician roles and liabilities in court testimony.