[Medical opinions in court--a challenge for communication between physicians and lawyers].
Medical opinions in court constitute a great challenge in regard to communication between physicians and lawyers. Considerable differences in their professional training and requirements frequently result in misunderstandings. Therefore physicians and lawyers need to learn more about each other and interact when evaluating opinions. A synergistic rather than a conflicting approach would help judges to find the happy medium between accepting medical reports unreservedly and coming to their own conclusions in more or less total disregard of the medical opinion presented in court. The expert, on the other hand, must ensure that the judge will understand the opinion as it was meant. Neither of them can call upon a translator.
Dierks
Ch
Ch
Zentrum für Human-und Geisteswissenschaften Charité-Universitatäsmedizin Berlin.
D002547:Cerebral Palsy / Q000209:etiology; D002585:Cesarean Section / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D003142:Communication; D034462:Dissent and Disputes; D005104:Expert Testimony / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005858:Germany; D006801:Humans; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D007235:Infant, Premature, Diseases / Q000209:etiology; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D033222:Judicial Role; D033241:Lawyers; D008318:Malpractice / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D008405:Massage / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D019838:Neck Injuries / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000209:etiology; D010820:Physicians