Our system of adjudicating medical malpractice cases is often called "the battle of the experts." Each side finds an expert to support its view of the case. With respect to the emergency physician, testimony should be supported by emergency medicine literature. Often, however, opinions are divided. That opinion from a body of experts is needed in all the cases since each case has to be decided on its own merits and intricacies.[36] There are hundreds of Medical Negligence cases coming up every day in Consumer Forums across the country. And in many a cases, expert opinion or expert evidence is not being adduced simply because of technical glitches. It is best that a separate set of courts be designated to Medical Negligence cases. This would provide a twofold benefit. Firstly, it would benefit the patient since he will have a specific forum and a specific …show more content…
This is persuasive when weighed by a jury, particularly when a stroke victim is sitting in the courtroom.
This presents a danger to primary care physicians, because in most jurisdictions it is the physician who has the most expertise in a certain type of injury who will testify about what should or should not have been done in the case. Does that mean that an emergency physician will be held to the standards of all specialists? In this type of system, it may mean exactly that, even though it is neither a reasonable standard nor the true standard for the emergency physician.
To prevail, an "expert" must testify and a jury must be persuaded. The expert opinion may support an inappropriate standard of care. A jury is not necessarily equipped with the knowledge and background necessary to understand the science and medical issues of the