[Expert assessment of naturopathy, alternative treatment methods and homeopathic practitioners].
An expert opinion on genuine naturopathy cures which have widely been integrated into so-called "medical-school" treatment usually presents no problem. Difficulties may arise, however, when evaluating so-called alternative or unconventional methods, as it is typical for these to be based on hypothetical thinking patterns, and more so, as there is no proof of action in the postulated fields of indication that would meet current standards. Here, it is the task of the expert to determine whether the assertions of the appliers of these methods are comprehensible and substantiated and whether the methods may be considered medically indicated for the individual case. The claim of those practicing these methods that they are the only ones capable of judging them must be denied in principle. To determine if there is a medical indication for treatment by a non-medical practitioner in any individual case, the criteria applied should be basically the same as for medical treatment by a physician. Also, according to a judgment by the German Federal Court, a non-medical practitioner using invasive methods must meet the same standards of knowledge and advanced training as any general practitioner working in this field.
Ostendorf
G M
GM
D000529:Complementary Therapies / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005104:Expert Testimony / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005858:Germany; D006705:Homeopathy / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D008318:Malpractice / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D009324:Naturopathy; D012307:Risk Factors
Begutachtung von Naturheilverfahren, alternativen Behandlungsmethoden und Heilpraktikern.