Modlin H C
Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 1990;18(2):153-62.
This paper concerning the last 87 malpractice cases referred to the Department of Psychiatry and Law, Menninger Clinic, includes 57 suits against mental health practitioners and/or institutions, and 30 nonpsychiatric suits against general hospitals, surgeons, obstetricians, etc. A patient was available for interview in only 12 percent of the psychiatric cases; in 88 percent we reviewed medical records and consulted with attorneys. In the psychiatric cases the crucial question was whether a generally accepted standard of care was breached. The inherent problems of applying appropriate criteria to standards of care by practitioners and institutions are discussed. In half the psychiatric cases we found no significant deviation from acceptable clinical performance; in half we concluded that negligent practice had occurred. We did see a litigant for evaluation in 90 percent of the nonpsychiatric cases. The main issue involving them concerned harm or disability related to presumed negligence by medical personnel. How we evaluate such cases and apply disability criteria is discussed.
本文涉及转至门宁格诊所精神科与法律部的最近87起医疗事故案件,其中包括57起针对精神健康从业者和/或机构的诉讼,以及30起针对综合医院、外科医生、产科医生等的非精神科诉讼。在精神科案件中,只有12%的案件有患者可供面谈;88%的案件我们查阅了病历并与律师进行了咨询。在精神科案件中,关键问题是是否违反了普遍认可的护理标准。文中讨论了从业者和机构将适当标准应用于护理标准时所固有的问题。在一半的精神科案件中,我们发现与可接受的临床行为没有显著偏差;在另一半案件中,我们得出结论认为存在过失行为。在90%的非精神科案件中,我们确实对诉讼当事人进行了评估。涉及这些案件的主要问题是与医务人员推定的过失相关的伤害或残疾。文中讨论了我们如何评估此类案件以及应用残疾标准。