OF MALPRACTICE CASES WHICH NEGOTIATED GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE COURT OF FORENSIC MEDICINE (GACFM) AND FOUNDED CONTRADICTORY
OPINIONS BETWEEN THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONS (SC) OF COUNCIL OF FORENSIC MEDICINE (CFM) AND HIGH HEALTH COMMITTEE (HHC)
Guzel S, Yavuz
MS, Asirdizer M.
The Bulletin of Legal Medicine (Turkish), 2002; 7(1): 14-20.
Diseases, disablements and deaths which claimed that caused by faulty behaviors
of medical doctor and other health personnel or the health institutions have been increasingly coming to the agenda of courts
at the last days. For this cases, HHC and CFM are charged to the expertise according to the tenors of the laws.
Courts resource to SC of CFM in cases of suits for damage to determine if there
is any fault of medical doctor and other health personnel and if there is any fault to determine the degree of this fault
for each of persons without taking of opinion of HHC, but in cases of criminal suits firstly take the opinion of HHC. Sometimes,
contra-dictionary opinions arise between the reports of these two institutions and in these situations, courts want to opinion
of the GACFM.
In this study, were examined reports of the SC of CFM, GACFM and HHC for 29
cases, the reports of HHC had been presented in 19 cases and hadn’t been presented 10 cases, asked the degree of fault
for medical doctor, assistant health person and hospital. The obtained datum were presented after were classified. The great
discordance between decision of HHC and of the SC of CFM or GACFM was paid attention. The principle reason for the defined
discordance was evaluated as being the in accordance of the constructions of HHC, SC of CFM and GACFM, and our opinions in
this subject were presented.
Key words: Malpractice, forensic medicine, courts.