I am a psychiatrist in Pennsylvania. I am interested in your case. I cannot serve as an expert witness. However, I can help you be more effective in using your defense expert witness.
1) As a matter of policy, these lawsuits deter doctors from helping the most needy and dangerous patients;
2) they violate Frye;
3) Lorazepam is often used to calm intensely suicidal patients; people who get agitated do so on first use (like we have five drinks, most of us want to sleep, a few of us want to fight);
4) unforeseen intervening causes should be put in evidence, this element of torts is often neglected by the defense;
5) for a thousand years, the intentional act of the suicide victim broke any chain of causation between negligence and the death. Hanging is not a medical procedure. The current legal view, of suing doctors for the intentional act of another, is quite wrong headed and not scientific:
6) most suicides are not caused by medications, but by relationship problems. Families cannot face that, and try to scapegoat the doctor;
7) if the victim had broken a law, a tort settlement should not reward law breaking;
8) demand 5 records of patients of the expert similar to the victim. If he does not have 5, he is not an expert. If he does, and any benzodiazepine was used, he should be disqualified, as a liar in his expert report. If he is anti-medication partisan, he should be disqualified as not representing the mainstream of care today. Hold the plaintiff expert witness accountable for any false testimony, including any statements about their resume. An example of false testimony is that a record was reviewed, when it was not. If a false statement is found, move to dismiss the case, and to charge all legal costs to the personal assets of the expert. To deter.
There would be no charge to you, if you want any brief record reviewed, including toxicology or expert reports.
David Behar, MD
No comments:
Post a Comment