Administrative Law Adjudications Involving Healthcare Professionals: Mental Health Expert Testimony

Abstract

Mental health experts are often needed to provide expert testimony about a respondent healthcare professional's retrospective mental state and prospective fitness for duty. This calls for the expert to parse the degree to which educational deficiency and mental illness were substantial contributing factors to any alleged past misconduct, and to offer recommendations for prospective mental health treatment and educational and supervisory remediation of any diagnosed disorders or deficiencies. Unlike adjudication of malpractice—in which the goal is to make an injured party whole by financial compensation for negligent harm—the goal of administrative agency investigation, adjudication, and peer review is to protect the public by serving as an overseer of the quality of the profession. Health care agency investigators and finders of fact require mental health experts who can discern applicable standards of care and procedure and who can offer opinions that may differ in nature substantially from those typically required in ordinary malpractice litigation.

Keywords

Administrative law expert witnesses healthcare professionals malpractice

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

42 U.S.C. § 11101 (1986).

42 U.S.C. § 11112 (1986).

42 U.S.C. § 11151 (1986).

American Medical Association. (2000). Physicians with disruptive behavior. Retrieved November 11, 2011, from http://www.ama-assn.org/resources/images/omss/cejae-9.045.pdf

American Medical Association. (2004). Report of the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (CEJA Report 12-A-04). Retrieved November 11, 2011, from http://www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/code-medical-ethics/907a.pdf

Austin v. American Association of Neurological Surgeons, 253 F.3d 967 (7th Cir. 2001).

Drogin

E. Y.

, & Meyer

D. J.

(2011). Psychiatric and psychological malpractice. In Drogin

E. Y.

Dattilio

F. M.

Sadoff

R. L.

, & Gutheil

T. G.

(Eds.), Handbook of forensic assessment: Psychological and psychiatric perspectives (pp. 543–570). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Fullerton v. Florida Medical Association, 938 So.2d 587 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006).

Guirguis-Blake

Fryer

G. E.

Phillips

R. L.

Szabat

, & Green

L. A.

(2006). The US medical liability system: Evidence for legislative reform. Annals of Family Medicine, 4, 240–246.

10.

Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine. (2001). Disruptive physician behavior. Retrieved November 11, 2011, from http://www.mass.gov/eohhs/docs/borim/policies-guidelines/policy-01-01.pdf

11.

Meyer

D. J.

Simon

R. I.

, & Shuman

D. W.

(2010). Professional liability in psychiatric practice and requisite standard of care. In Simon

R. I.

& Gold

L. H.

(Eds.), Textbook of forensic psychiatry (2nd ed., pp. 207–226). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

12.

Poliner v. Texas Health Systems, 537 F.3d 368 (5th Cir. 2008).

13.

Wood v. Archbold Medical Center, 738 F.Supp.2d 1298 (M.D. Ga. 2010).