No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The treating psychiatrist as expert witness
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 April 2024
Summary
Many authors have considered the ethical dilemmas of a doctor being both the treating physician and expert witness in litigation. The debate has often focused on the potential for bias and the adverse impact being an expert witness can have on the therapeutic alliance. Much of this debate seems rooted in the ethic of non-maleficence. In this article we attempt to examine the other end of this ethical quandary. Using a pragmatic approach, we explore these conflicts and consider biases from other sources. Ultimately, taking on the mantle of both roles is becoming increasingly unavoidable. Hence we argue that, although there are challenges, embracing this dual role can be an important part of holistic treatment, risk management and the pursuit of the ethical principle of justice.
- Type
- Clinical Reflection
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal College of Psychiatrists
References
References
General Medical Council (2023) Providing Witness Statements or Expert Evidence as Part of Legal Proceedings. GMC (https://www.gmc-uk.org/-/media/gmc-site/ethical-guidance/mdg-2023/providing-witness-statements-or-expert-evidence-as-part-of-legal-proceedings-english.pdf).Google Scholar
Gosney, P, Lomax, P, Hooper, C, et al (2019) Current appeal system for those detained in England and Wales under the Mental Health Act needs reform. Journal of Medical Ethics, 45: 173–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutheil, TG (2009) The Psychiatrist as Expert Witness. American Psychiatric Publishing.Google Scholar
Large, M, Nielssen, O, Elliott, G (2010) The reliability of evidence about psychiatric diagnosis after serious crime: part II. Agreement between experts and treating practitioners. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 38: 524–30.Google ScholarPubMed
Niveau, G, Godet, T, Vollm, B (2019) What does impartiality mean in medico-legal psychiatry? An international survey. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry, 66: 101505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osborne, CA (2007) Civil Justice Reform Project: Summary of Findings & Recommendations. Ministry of the Attorney General, Ontario (www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/cjrp).Google Scholar
Rix, K, Eastman, N, Haycroft, A (2017) After Pool: good practice guidelines for expert psychiatric witnesses. BJPsych Advances, 23: 385–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rix, K, Eastman, N, Adshead G, et al (2023) Responsibilities of Psychiatrists Who Provide Expert Evidence to Courts and Tribunals (College Report CR193). Royal College of Psychiatrists.Google Scholar
Woolf, H (1996) Access to Justice: Final Report to the Lord Chancellor on the Civil Justice System in England and Wales. Department of Constitutional Affairs (https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20060213223540/http://www.dca.gov.uk/civil/final/contents.htm).Google Scholar
Taylor, PJ, Graf, M, Schanda, H, et al (2012) The treating psychiatrist as expert in the courts: is it necessary or possible to separate the roles of physician and expert? Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 22: 271–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daggitt v Campbell [2016] ONSC 2742.Google Scholar
R v Choudhuri [2019] EWCA Crim 2341.Google Scholar
R v Turner [1975] QB 834.Google Scholar
Westerhof v Gee Estate [2015] ONCA 206.Google Scholar
Daggitt v Campbell [2016] ONSC 2742.Google Scholar
R v Choudhuri [2019] EWCA Crim 2341.Google Scholar
R v Turner [1975] QB 834.Google Scholar
Westerhof v Gee Estate [2015] ONCA 206.Google Scholar
eLetters
No eLetters have been published for this article.