Who is an expert??

The AMA has this issue “spot on”. Delegates target courts for liability reform expansion

Doctors believe that setting stricter parameters for who is allowed to testify in the courtroom and what information is allowed before a jury can help alleviate some of the medical liability insurance problems they’ve seen.

“Holding these experts accountable is both necessary and appropriate,” said Robert M. Phillips, MD, the delegate from the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.

Delegates directed the Association to create model state legislation that establishes standards similar to the ones used in the federal courts, including full and timely disclosure of expert witnesses’ opinions, reports, qualifications, compensation and prior cases in which they’ve testified.

Doctors also said experts testifying about medical liability issues should meet minimum standards, including:

• Comparable education, training and occupational experience in the same field as the defendant doctor or specialty expertise in the disease or the process performed in the case.
• Active educational practice or teaching experience in the same field as the defendant physician.
• Current experience within five years of the action that initiated the lawsuit.
• Certification by a board that the American Board of Medical Specialties or the American Osteopathic Assn. recognizes or by a board with equivalent standards.

If you are being sued for malpractice, and the case depends on expert testimony, the accused deserves an expert who meets standards. I could not expertly testify in a case of radiologic interpretation – as I am not a radiologist. I can testify regarding either inpatient or outpatient generalist care – because that is what I do.

I hope no one would object to crafting criteria for defining a witness as a expert. I assume that a defense attorney could already use these criteria to challenge a witness expert standing, however, I do not know that anyone has used criteria to challenge testimony.

Malpractice cases are too important to allow substandard testimony. We can set standards, and we should.

Thanks to Point of Law for alerting me to this link.