HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Knoll, J. Articles by Gerbasi, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Knoll, J. Articles by Gerbasi, J.

Psychiatric Malpractice Case Analysis: Striving For Objectivity

Dr. Knoll is Director of Forensic Psychiatry and Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH. Dr. Gerbasi is in private practice in Davis, CA. Address correspondence to: James Knoll, MD, New Hampshire Department of Corrections, Division of Forensic and Medical Services, 105 Pleasant Street, 4th Floor, Concord, NH 03302. E-mail: jknoll4{at}earthlink.net

Forensic psychiatrists, acting as expert witnesses, must be able to perform objective analyses of psychiatric malpractice cases. Accurate malpractice case analysis requires careful attention to relevant legal concepts and consideration of potential biasing influences. If forensic psychiatrists are to avoid a reliance on "experts policing experts," individual forensic psychiatrists must be fully prepared to police themselves by recognizing and avoiding certain errors in malpractice case analysis. Any effort to improve objectivity must include a clear understanding of the confounding variables. In this article, the authors discuss some potential impediments to objective analysis of malpractice cases such as the use of the wrong standard, causation, hindsight bias, and contributory negligence.