Child Neurologist as Expert Witness: A Report of the Ethics and Practice Committees of the Child Neurology Society

A questionnaire was circulated to 1126 members of the Child Neurology Society to assess their opinions regarding the current medical-legal system and to determine the involvement of members of the Child Neurology Society as expert witnesses. Two-hundred eighty-five questionnaires were completed, corresponding to a response rate of 25.3%. Of the respondents, 52% were child neurologists in university-based, academic practices, whereas 32% were in private practice. Approximately 90% of the respondents reviewed cases for attorneys, and 37% of these reviewed five or more cases per year. The majority, 86%, had testified or been deposed as a treating physician, and 42% of the respondents had been the object of a medical liability lawsuit. Only 30% of the respondents believed that the current medical malpractice system was fair, and nearly 90% of the respondents indicated that the system should be reformed. Two thirds of the respondents indicated that there should be a mechanism for peer review and more than half believed that the Child Neurology Society should monitor the expert witness activities of its members. These results indicate that although child neurologists frequently participate as medical experts, the respondents have an unfavorable opinion of the current medical liability system. Based on the results of the questionnaire and the need for reform in the current system, monitoring of the expert witness activities of child neurologists should be considered. (J Child Neurol 1998;13:398-401).