Expert witness malfeasance: How should specialty societies respond?

American Journal of Gastroenterology

Volumn 100, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 991-995

  Feld, Andrew D ^a,c   Carey, William D ^b  

^a CENTER FOR HEALTH STUDIES   (United States)

^b LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c CSB 2 ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCREDITATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COURT; EXPECTATION; EXPERT WITNESS; FORGERY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; LEGAL ASPECT; MEDICAL CARE; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL LIABILITY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REVIEW; WITNESS; ARTICLE; ETHICS; FORENSIC MEDICINE; HUMAN; LEGAL LIABILITY; MEDICINE; NEUROSURGERY; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; POLICY; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; RECUMBENCY; RESEARCH; UNITED STATES;

AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION; CODES OF ETHICS; DECEPTION; EXPERT TESTIMONY; FORENSIC MEDICINE; HUMANS; LIABILITY, LEGAL; NEUROSURGERY; ORGANIZATIONAL POLICY; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; RESEARCH; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; SPECIALTIES, MEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 19144371070     PISSN: 00029270     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.50180.x     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Foster WL. Expert testimony-prevalent complaints and proposed remedies. Harvard Law Rev 1898;XI:169-86.
2. Sanbar SS, Gibofsky A, Firestone MH, et al Legal medicine. St. Louis: Mosby, 1995.
3. Berlin L. The miasmatic expert witness. Am J Radiol 2003;181:29-35.
4. Milunsky A. Lies, damned lies, and medical experts: The abrogation of responsibilities by specialty organizations and a call for action. J Child Neurol 2003; 18:413-19.
5. Guthiel TG, Hauser M, White MS, et al The whole truth versus the admissible truth: An ethics dilemma for expert witnesses. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2003;319(4):422-7.
6. Frye v. Unites States, 293 F.1013 (D.C.Circ 1923).
7. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 509, U.S. 579 (1993).
8. Annas GJ. Scientific evidence in the courtroom-the death of the frye rule. N Engl J Med 1994;330:1018-21.
9. Austin v. American Association of Neurological Surgeons 253 F.3d 967 (2001).
10. Pelton RM. Professing professional conduct: AANS raises the bar for expert testimony. AANS Bull Spring 2002;9:7-13.
11. Pelton RM. Medical societies self-policing of unprofessional expert testimony. Ann Health Law 2004;13:549.
12. College Develops Expert Witness Affirmation. Bulletin of the American College of Surgeons 2004;89:33-34.
13. Austin v. American Association of Neurological Surgeons 543 U.S. 1078(2002).
14. Cohen FL. The expert medical witness in legal perspective. J Leg Med 2004;25(2):185-209.
15. Goldrich MS. Report of the council on ethical and judicial affairs: CEJA Report 12 American Medical Association, 2004.
16. Victoroff MS. Peer review of the inexpert witness, or ... do you trust the chickens to guard the coop? Manag Care September 2002; 11:25-26.
17. Glabman M. Scared silent: The clash between malpractice lawsuits and expert testimony. Physician Exec 2003;29(14):42.
18. American Medical Association Litigation Center. Available at http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/4618.html.