Minnigerode B
HNO. 1980 May;28(5):148-52.
The expert's opinion in medical liability process differs from other medical certificates by the particularity, that the facts of a case of the injury becomes object of the examination and enlightment by the medical expert. This supposes a medical scientific correct reply of the questions of the court of the justice, which must be verifiable with the way of thinking conventional in the jurisdiction and which has to adjust to these trains of thought. Proceeding on a revision of the expert opinions collected in the liability evidence archiv of the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery a series of continual recurrent mistakes is pointed out, which could cause a defective expert opinion and thereby possibly a wrong judical decision.
在医疗责任认定过程中,专家意见不同于其他医学证明,其特殊性在于医疗伤害案件的事实成为医学专家审查和阐释的对象。这就要求对司法法院的问题给出医学科学上正确的答复,该答复必须能用司法领域的常规思维方式加以验证,并且必须符合这些思维方式。通过对德国耳鼻咽喉头颈外科学会责任证据档案中收集的专家意见进行审查,发现了一系列持续反复出现的错误,这些错误可能导致专家意见有缺陷,进而可能导致错误的司法判决。