A major impediment to appropriate adjudication in medical malpractice cases is the large difference in knowledge and background of the experts witness compared to judges, other litigants and juries. Such disparities make it plausible for an expert witness to support an issue, even in defiance of common sense. The most basic understanding of the atmosphere and practices surrounding critical events and the routine procedures, techniques and equipment which are employed in critical situations is absent. (McAbee GN: Improper expert medical testimony: Existing and proposed mechanisms of oversight. Journal of Legal Medicine 19: 257-272, 1998).
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||5|
|Journal||Medicine and Law|
|State||Published - 2001|
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Health Policy