Document Detail

The treating psychiatrist as expert in the courts: is it necessary or possible to separate the roles of physician and expert?
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  23015389     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
BACKGROUND: Certified medical specialists, including forensic psychiatrists, from the 27 member states of the European Union (EU) may practise in each other's countries, but there are professional and legal differences between them. One may lie in whether a patient's treating doctor/clinician may give expert evidence about that person in court.
AIMS: To examine similarities and differences between EU jurisdictions in law and practice in combining or separating such roles and to review the evidence in support of either position.
METHODS: A psychiatrist with court experience was contacted in each EU country about law, practice and guidance on division of clinician-expert roles. Published literature was searched for an evidence base for practice in the field. Additional material is from discussion at a residential meeting of practising forensic psychiatrists from Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK.
RESULTS: All acknowledge that a treating clinician can never be an independent expert in that case, but the 22 (of 27) EU countries responding vary in law and practice on whether the dual role may be assumed. There has been almost no research interest in factors relevant to separation of roles. International discussion revealed that ethical and practice issues are not straightforward.
CONCLUSIONS: On current evidence, either separation or combination of clinical and expert roles in a particular case may be acceptable. Insofar as there are national legal or professional guidelines on this issue, anyone practising in that country must follow them and may safely do so, regardless of practice in their native country. The most important ethical issue lies in clarity for all parties on the nature and extent of roles in the case. This paper has additional material online.
Pamela J Taylor; Marc Graf; Hans Schanda; Birgit Völlm
Related Documents :
11658219 - What is bioethics without christianity?
1617889 - Ethical issues in obstetric cases involving prematurity.
17845499 - Legitimizing the shameful: end-of-life ethics and the political economy of death.
20579249 - Resolving ethical issues in stem cell clinical trials: the example of parkinson disease.
20693739 - Hiv testing and treatment with correctional populations: people, not prisoners.
19407039 - Iran's experience with surrogate motherhood: an islamic view and ethical concerns.
7205979 - Hypozincemia, ageusia, dysosmia, and toilet tissue pica.
11310069 - Organ donation: the debate.
23256669 - The 9th siena meeting: from genome to proteome: open innovations.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Criminal behaviour and mental health : CBMH     Volume:  22     ISSN:  1471-2857     ISO Abbreviation:  Crim Behav Ment Health     Publication Date:  2012 Oct 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2012-09-27     Completed Date:  2013-02-25     Revised Date:  2013-03-19    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  9309668     Medline TA:  Crim Behav Ment Health     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  271-92     Citation Subset:  IM    
Copyright Information:
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Criminal Law
Expert Testimony / legislation & jurisprudence*
Forensic Psychiatry / legislation & jurisprudence*
Comment In:
Crim Behav Ment Health. 2013 Feb;23(1):72-3   [PMID:  23355505 ]

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Selling forensic psychiatry: recruiting for the future, establishing services.
Next Document:  Tuning the Electrical and Optical Properties of Diketopyrrolopyrrole Complexes for Panchromatic Dye-...