Rethinking the admissibility of medical treatises as evidence

This Article examines the issues and questions which underlie the debate over the admission of "medical treatises" into evidence. The admissibility of this type of evidence is at issue most often in litigation involving complex medico-legal issues. This article outlines the evidentiary bas...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:American journal of law & medicine 1991-01, Vol.17 (3), p.209-248
Main Authors: Lipton, J P, O'Connor, M, Sales, B D
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Court hearings & proceedings
Courts
Evidence, Expert
Expert evidence
Expert Testimony
Expert Witnesses
Female
Forensic Medicine
Humans
Jurisprudence
Laws, regulations and rules
Legal Cases
Litigation
Male
Medical research
Medicine
Periodicals as Topic - standards
Publishing - standards
Research - standards
Scientific Misconduct
United States
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This Article examines the issues and questions which underlie the debate over the admission of "medical treatises" into evidence. The admissibility of this type of evidence is at issue most often in litigation involving complex medico-legal issues. This article outlines the evidentiary basis for admission of medical treatises and discusses the quality of medical treatises in an effort to determine what value to the fact-finder these treatises actually hold. The authors contend that there is an inherent untrustworthiness associated with medical treatises, but do not go so far as to suggest that medical treatises should never be admitted. The Article concludes that there is a need for greater caution in determining admissibility and recommends safeguards to better guarantee trustworthiness and reliability.
ISSN:0098-8588
2375-835X
DOI:10.1017/S0098858800009035