Causality and yardstick in medical malpractice expertise and judicial expertise

WANG Yue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-5329.2008.05.020

2008-01-01

Abstract:In judicial practice of medical malpractice case,expertise is the the point at issue between plaintiff and defendant. The expertise is provided in order to supply your judicial opinion,so yardstick and causality is most important things in medical malpractice judicial practice in China.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Judgment on Causality in Medical Malpractice

Yao Jia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1005-7803.2008.02.041

2008-01-01

Abstract:The judgment on causality in civil laws has perlexed the scholars and courts for many years.Due to the particularities of many kinds in medical services,the causality in medical malpractice seems even more complicated and confusing.On the basis of analysing and referring to the various kinds of causalities in tort,this article advocates the causality dichotomy,and further discusses the judgment on causality in medical malpractice.
On Suggestion of Expert in Justice

LI WEI

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-472x.2008.02.026

2008-01-01

Journal of Xidian University

Abstract:The administration of justice is not a course in which the legal norm is applied logically,but one including numerous delicate and complicated judgements,which becomes more obvious in hard case. Judges meet with the questions of making no adequate defense sometimes. In order to judge a case and solve the dispute effectively and fairly,judges have to resort to some other legal knowledge,among which is the suggestion from the expert.
Causality of Medical Malpractice Lawsuits

李晓农,刘群

2004-01-01

Abstract:The causality of medical malpractice lawsuit is an important problem. Hie composition first introduces the conception of causality. Then it respectively states the theories conceming causality in continental law system and Anglo - American law system. The composition points out that these foreign experience and practice are deserve learning.
A Practical Analysis on the Legal Regulation of Medical Malpractice

Wang Cheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14111/j.cnki.zgfx.2010.05.005

2010-01-01

Abstract:The data and experience from some hospitals and courts in Beijing indicated that only a fewmedical disputes between doctors and suffers were resolved by litigations. Usually,the two parties in medicaltort litigations were extremely antagonistic to each other. The medical record was the only proof that recognizedby two parties,which meant that the proving of fault was actually the initiating and completing of medical appraisement. Presumption of fault should be the principle of liability in medical tort. Damage is the basic fact,and fault is the presumed fact. How the Supreme Court will standardize medical appraisement after the effec-tiveness of Tort Law is worth of expecting.
Identification of Negligence in Medicine Malpractice Lawsuit.

HE Huai-wen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-1226.2005.02.008

2005-01-01

Abstract:Negligence in medical practice comes from violation of applicable standard of care. Such standards in common law of U.S.A have evolved from customary practice to acceptable practice, which accommodate the need of new development in clinic medicine, along with several doctrines governing establishment of negligence in malpractice. As in civil procedure, plaintiff-patient's expert witness plays the role of establishment of the applicable standards of care and the violation thereof on defendant-physician's part. In china, the substantive standards are the customary ones which have several flaws, and in proceeding, there is no such an expert, but the burden of proof of no-fault is otherwise uniformly laid on defendant-physician's part. However, as a matte of both law and fact, the establishment of negligence is dependent upon verification by medical association, which is of paramount importance. The customary standard is in many aspects in conflict with burden of proof and verification system. As to the legal relationship between such verification and the proceeding, the accountability thereof on designated professional group who carry the verification, is open to debate. But ancillary professional witness and the possible professional assessor may shed auspicious light on professional requirement of this type of lawsuit.
Lessons Drawn from the "Expert Witness Rule" of the Courts in the US in Hearing Medical Disputes Cases and its Revelation to China——a case study of two cases in P.R. China and the US

YANG Xiao-chun,WANG Bai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-6627.2007.06.019

2007-01-01

Abstract:Recently, there are more and more medical dispute cases, with a large number of contradictions gathered in People's Courts. In hearing these cases, the judges are put into a dilemma, especially the collection of evidence. Based on this situation, the author proposed that People's court should have "expert assistant" in using "Expert Witness Rule" of US, which will be helpful to solving these problems effectively.
Comparation between Guidance for Judicial Expertise of Medical Malpractice and Medical Association Identification Rules of Medical Damage

Zi-Hui Cheng,Lu Zhang,Liang Wang,Jie Zhang,Ling-Jie Kong,Long Yu,Song-Yue He

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12116/j.issn.1004-5619.2022.220205

2022-04-25

Abstract:On the basis of retaining the technical identification system of medical negligence, the Medical Association Identification Rules of Medical Damage mainly provides technical services for various types of conciliation work about doctor-patient dispute. Its identification work is still influenced by the thinking of medical negligence technical identification and has certain administrative color. Guidance for Judicial Expertise of Medical Malpractice is mainly reflected that the trial of civil cases and pre-trial mediation of courts need service. Its procedures and evidence review are strictly required by the litigation rules and has the characteristics of public legal services provided as a third-party neutral institution. Technical identification of medical damage, whether organized by the Medical Association or the forensic identification institutions, is carried out under the background of the current Regulations on the Prevention and Treatment of Medical Disputes and the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China; both have a corresponding positive role in regulating the medical damage identification activities, and have also laid a certain foundation for the establishment of a unified identification system in the future in China. To understand the different characteristics of the medical damage identification rules issued by the Chinese Medical Association and the Ministry of Justice, and to improve the understanding of the standardization of the forensic identification of medical damage, a comparative study was conducted on Medical Association Identification Rules of Medical Damage and Guidance for Judicial Expertise of Medical Malpractice from seven aspects: Concept and legal status, entrust of identification, identification acceptance, identification procedures, identification presentation meeting, theory of medical malpractice evaluation, consequences and causality of medical damage. The subject of evaluation, the function of evidence review, the role of consulting experts, the technical standard system of malpractice evaluation and other contents were emphatically analyzed.
Countermeasure on the dual expert witness model of medical tort liability

TUO Lin,ZHOU Hongzhu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1671-0592.2013.06.022

2013-01-01

Abstract:The paper analyses the current status of medical tort liability assessment in China,before and after the implementation of Tort Liability Law and demonstrates the binary structure of appraisement system issues which are caused by wrong understanding the notice "on judging medical dispute civil cases referring to the Medical Accident Treatment Regulations" issued by the Supreme People's Court.The authors aim to solve medical technical problems in medical tort civil action in scientific and fair way by identifying the defects of binary structure of appraisement system issues and exploring legal and reasonable medical tort liability assessment methods.
Inequality in the Last Resort: How Medical Appraisal Affects Malpractice Litigations in China

Liang Fengbo,Liu Junqiang,Zhou Hui,Liu Paicheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-020-02386-x

2020-01-01

International Journal of Legal Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Medical malpractice litigations affect the practices of patient safety. However, medical malpractice litigations involve highly specialized knowledge. Thus, medical appraisal is usually essential in the ascertainment of responsibility and judicial decision-making. China's judicial system is characterized by a dual-mode of medical appraisal resulting from two parallel appraisal agencies: judicial appraisal institutions and medical associations. This paper examines whether or not and how choices of different medical appraisal agencies affect malpractice lawsuit results in China.METHODS:We collected and sampled a total of 2557 verdicts pertaining to medical disputes from "China Judgements Online" in 2014. We used an ordinary least square regression model and a mediating effect regression model to analyze to what extent and how different choices between two medical appraisal agencies affect malpractice litigations.RESULTS:(1) Almost 81.55% (2082) of litigants resorted to medical malpractice appraisals in China in 2014. Among 2070 cases with appraisal results accepted by the court, 60.10% of the litigants chose judicial appraisal institutions (1244), as opposed to medical associations (826). (2) Among 2557 cases, 2306 (90.18%) claimed compensation and 1919 (83.22%) were awarded compensation by the courts. The proportion of compensation paid in a case is 48% on average. (3) Appraisal agencies matter in the investigation of medical errors, which in turn affects the proportion of compensation paid in a case. (4) Choosing judicial appraisal institutions will raise the proportion of compensation paid by about 10% on average.CONCLUSIONS:Different choices between appraisal institutions affect malpractice litigations in China. As the last resort for remedying medical malpractice, medical appraisals in the judicial system could be a source of inequality in China's medical litigation outcomes.
THE EVOLUTION OF GUANXI DYNAMICS IN THE CHINESE LEGAL SYSTEM: A PERSPECTIVE OF CAREER MOBILITY

Yuqing Feng,Qing Xu

2021-01-01

Hong kong law journal

Abstract:Drawing on first-hand empirical data, this article analyses how guanxi dynamics facilitate judicial career mobility in China's legal system. Based on the varying perceptions and behaviours of judges with respect to guanxi, we distinguish guanxi dynamics: the default overt-guanxi and the emerging covert-guanxi. In the former, judges perceive guanxi as being justified by social norms and employ guanxi practice openly and sometimes abusively. In the latter, judges adopt a more prudent attitude towards guanxi and employ it in a more devious and deceptive manner. They comply with formal procedures and grant an increasingly important role to professionalism, which disguises guanxi's genuine influence and maintains formalistic legitimacy. These dynamics have evolved in step with increases in market competition, institutional certainty and political control that have occurred since the 2000s; the covert-guanxi mode is gradually supplanting the overt-guanxi mode, illustrating the continued persistence of guanxi in contemporary China.
How expert witnesses' counterfactuals influence causal and responsibility attributions of mock jurors and expert judges

Patrizia Catellani,Mauro Bertolotti,Monia Vagni,Daniela Pajardi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3720

2020-08-06

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Abstract:Past research has shown that counterfactual ("If…then…") thoughts influence causal and responsibility attribution in the judicial context. However, little is known on whether and how the use of counterfactuals in communication affects lay jurors' and judges' evaluations. In two studies, we asked mock lay jurors (Study 1) and actual judges (Study 2) to read a medical malpractice case followed by an expert witness report which included counterfactuals focused on either the physician, the patient, or external factors. Results showed that counterfactual focus had a strong direct effect on both lay jurors' and judges' causal and responsibility attributions. Counterfactual focus also moderated the effect of outcome foreseeability on responsibility attribution. Discussion focuses on how counterfactual communication can direct causal and responsibility attribution and reduce the importance of other factors known to influence judicial decision‐making. The potential implications of these findings in training programs and debiasing interventions are also discussed.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

psychology, experimental
Gauging Court Adjudication: Qualification And Quantification

Le Cheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ijld-2019-2019

2019-01-01

International Journal of Legal Discourse

Abstract:In common law jurisdictions, the notion of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is frequently related to notions such as the belief or certainty of a judge or a juror about reality. The notion of balance of probabilities is however related to likelihood or probability. In the present study, we link belief and proof by introducing the notion of epistemic modality, which is concerned with the speaker's belief in propositional probability. The variation in the orientation of epistemic modality helps to integrate the two levels of proof and bridge the apparent test gap between them. The notion of relevance is further introduced in order to clarify the nature of legal proof by taking rape cases as example. This study also provides an integrated model to improve but diversify the expressions in terms of the burden of proof. For most courts, court judgments are processed only according to the general case data, procedural context; such kinds of fact-based information processing and information retrieval seldom help the court to make its decision unless with tremendous and repetitious work. For the consistency and efficiency of court adjudication, it is suggested in the present study that a Knowledge Management (KM) model mainly based on elements and factors which decide or affect the criminal liability. Such a KM model provides an overall framework, though non-exhaustive, and therefore makes court adjudication within narrow discretion and achieves the maximum justice.
Difficult Litigation Issues on Compensation for Medical Malpractice and Trial Countermeasures

Sun Dongdong,Zhang Peng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-1226.2011.03.010

2011-01-01

Abstract:Chapter VII of "Tort Liability Act"lefts some difficult issues,such as party selection,determination of cause of case,identifying standard of medical negligence and causation,property of medical record evidence,appraisal system and many other practical issues.To settle these Judicial practice issues,the Supreme People′s Court has now issued parts of judicial interpretations,,but all substantial issues have not been resolved yet.Since it takes time for the Supreme People′s Court to issue judicial interpretation,local Higher People′s Court can issue local judicial guidance documents for the judicial practice of the local specific situations prior to the Supreme People's Court′s interpretation.Until now we know the four local trial guidance documents issued by Zhejiang,Jiangsu,Shanghai,Beijing,and these four cities or provinces have resolved some problems over compensation disputes for medical malpractice cases in local courts.These guidance documents are innovations in the system and with strong Operability.The introduction of guidance documents of local judicial trial not only solves the plight of compensation cases for medical damages in current local courts,but also accumulates experiences for the Supreme People′s Court for its legislating judicial interpretation.
Identification Principle and Thought of "Medical Malpractice" Based on Theoretical Analysis

Xu Wang,Xiao-Hua Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12116/j.issn.1004-5619.2022.220203

2022-04-25

Abstract:At present, medical disputes are still widely-concerned social problems and occasionally evolve into severe social events. In the dispute settlement mechanism, forensic identification opinion is the important technical support. Due to the high professionalism and complexity of medicine, the identification of medical malpractice has become major and difficult problem in the identification. This paper systematically analyze the concept of medical malpractice and five legal theories of malpractice determination, pointing out that China's forensic identification of medical damage should be led by the theory of "medical standards", supplemented by "prudent patient" standard and strengthen "peer review" in form. At the same time, seven main identification principles should be followed in practice: (1) take "obligation of diagnosis and treatment" as the basic principle of medical malpractice identification; (2) take whether to fulfill the obligation of diagnosis and treatment corresponding to current medical level as the specific principle; (3) take diagnosis and treatment routine, norms and guidelines as the main basis; (4) the principle of "peer review"; (5) the principle of "the generality of medical emergency action"; (6) the principle of "notification-informed-consent"; (7) the principle of "review of complications". This paper also puts forward the corresponding identification ideas in view of the above principles, hoping this helps standardize medical damage forensic identification activities.
Analysis About Medical Malpractice Crime Case

LIU Ruishuang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.19752/j.cnki.1004-6607.2005.02.013

2005-01-01

Abstract:In the case ,the counsel defend the accused doctor by the means of overturning the medical mal-practice appraisal which be guilty of a crime according to the principle of illegal evidence must being eliminated. There are no enough factors according to the theory of criminal fabrication .It means no guilty .The 335 article of criminal law need to be explained.
[Expert evidence. General prerequisites and procedural characteristics for expert opinions]

K Ulsenheimer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00101-005-0934-y

Abstract:In view of the boom in medical liability suits, which centre around medical malpractice, the decision of the medical expert is the pivot in the conflict between doctor and patient. Therefore, from a legal point of view it is extremely important that the expert is well prepared for a courtroom appearance. Beginning from a systematic and logical structure of the expert opinion, the most important demands on quality are dealt with: professional competence, objectivity and impartiality, intellectual integrity and intelligibility of speech, duty to give a strictly personal delivery of the opinion, limitation to the medical specialty, no legal comments, no insinuation and strict adherence to the theme. As an aid to the Judge, the expert must have a certain degree of background legal knowledge. This includes the peculiarities of civil and criminal procedures with respect to the burden of proof, the causality of medical or organisational errors in treatment leading to injury or even death of the patient, the significance of the term "a probability bordering on certainty", the meaning of "gross" errors in treatment, the guidelines and the medical standards. The obligation of the medical expert in questions of medical malpractice is not only an extremely responsible and difficult one, but also not without risk for the expert himself. Since August 2002 gross negligent errors by the expert are also liable for compensation in law under [section sign] 839a of the German Civil Code Book.
Comparison Between the of Expert Witness Model and the Judicial Identification (Expert Testimony) Model

Wang Jiancheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-1226.2010.01.002

2010-01-01

Abstract:The Expert witness and judicial identification (expert testimony) are two different procedural models used for the proof of special facts; the former is employed in common law systems while the later is employed in civil law systems. There are many differences between these two models , including among others: the basis of the legal culture, the role and qualification of relevant experts, the motivation of procedure, the examination of evidence, the competence of evidence and the capability of proof. Each model, however, has its own shortcomings. As a result, reforms have taken place in many countries, and there appears a tendency of structural melding or adaptation between the two models.
The Experience in the Double Causation in Anglo-american Criminal Law

Wen-hao CHEN,Zi-li GUO

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-626x.2016.03.018

2016-01-01

Abstract:The causation in anglo-american criminal law takes double mode, the fact judgement is before the legal judge-ment. Fact causation is centered with but-for principle, and take the theory of NESS and real factor standard in the situation of enlarging the scale of punishment. legal causation takes the rule of"close cause" as the center, which considers the proba-bility of causing the result. The theory of foreseen is criticized with convint a crime by a person's mind, the theory of con-cept is too abstract, and the theory of policy sees people as tools.The double causation in anglo-american criminal law is more logical than continental law system,the judgement of causation is clear and practical,and deserves us ti leran.
Study on Pragmatic Cooperative Principles of Jury Instructions in Hong Kong

章文君,程乐

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-5035.2012.02.020

2012-01-01

Abstract:Violation of Cooperative Principles in pragmatics in jury instructions could bring about various cor- responding legal consequences in legal procedures. By carrying out a case-based study in Hong Kong, it reveals that not every ambiguity, contradiction or deficiency in jury instruction will necessarily lead to the violation of legal procedures, but the violation of Cooperative Principles in pragmatics is obviously one of the crucial rationales for the litigant＇ s appeal and the appellate court ＇ s suspension or quashing of the original decision rendered by the lower court. The paper, therefore, suggests that Cooperative Principles should be the guidance to analyze whether the le- gal procedures are violated or not in jury instructions, which may also have the referential significance for the per- fection of judge＇ s aufldanmgsrecht just integrated in the legal proceeding in Mainland China.
Studies of Relief for Low Cure Rate Patients Damage Caused by Medical Malpractice

YAO Jia

2012-01-01

Abstract:When Medical malpractice causes Low cure rate of patients' damage,it is difficult to prove the causation between ultimate damage and medical malpractice according to the traditional theory,so they cannot be compensated.Under China's current legal framework,the concept of damage can be converted,"the theory of Expecting right",from abroad,can deal with related issues.But the "survival probability" is a statistical conclusion,if the survival probability of concrete patient is not reduced,the tort liability of defendant cannot constituted.

Causality and yardstick in medical malpractice expertise and judicial expertise

The Judgment on Causality in Medical Malpractice

On Suggestion of Expert in Justice

Causality of Medical Malpractice Lawsuits

A Practical Analysis on the Legal Regulation of Medical Malpractice

Identification of Negligence in Medicine Malpractice Lawsuit.

Lessons Drawn from the "Expert Witness Rule" of the Courts in the US in Hearing Medical Disputes Cases and its Revelation to China——a case study of two cases in P.R. China and the US

Comparation between Guidance for Judicial Expertise of Medical Malpractice and Medical Association Identification Rules of Medical Damage

Countermeasure on the dual expert witness model of medical tort liability

Inequality in the Last Resort: How Medical Appraisal Affects Malpractice Litigations in China

THE EVOLUTION OF GUANXI DYNAMICS IN THE CHINESE LEGAL SYSTEM: A PERSPECTIVE OF CAREER MOBILITY

How expert witnesses' counterfactuals influence causal and responsibility attributions of mock jurors and expert judges

Gauging Court Adjudication: Qualification And Quantification

Difficult Litigation Issues on Compensation for Medical Malpractice and Trial Countermeasures

Identification Principle and Thought of "Medical Malpractice" Based on Theoretical Analysis

Analysis About Medical Malpractice Crime Case

[Expert evidence. General prerequisites and procedural characteristics for expert opinions]

Comparison Between the of Expert Witness Model and the Judicial Identification (Expert Testimony) Model

The Experience in the Double Causation in Anglo-american Criminal Law

Study on Pragmatic Cooperative Principles of Jury Instructions in Hong Kong

Studies of Relief for Low Cure Rate Patients Damage Caused by Medical Malpractice