Make your own free website on Tripod.com

baslik-mikst.jpg

OUR DEPARTMENT'S MANUSCRIPTS
ALL MANUSCRIPTS
YAVUZ'S MANUSCRIPTS
ASIRDIZER'S MANUSCRIPTS
ZEYFEOGLU'S MANUSCRIPTS
DIZDAR'S MANUSCRIPTS
TUYJI'S MANUSCRIPTS
CITATION FORMS

CODE: 1076
 

THE EVALUATION 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.

 

ABSTRACT

 

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.

CITED BY:

1. Küçüker H, Fidan H. “Sağlık personelinin mesleki uygulama kusurları ve yargısal dokunulmazlığının incelenmesi ( Batı Karadeniz Bölgesi çalışması )”, VI. Adli Bilimler Kongresi. 28-30 Mayıs 2004-İstanbul. Kongre Özet Kitabı.

2. Küçüker H, Fidan H. “Sağlık personelinin mesleki uygulama kusurları ve yargısal dokunulmazlığının incelenmesi ( Batı Karadeniz Bölgesi çalışması )”, Adli Tıp Dergisi. 2005; 19 (2): 33-7.

3. Yorulmaz C. “Meme görüntülemesinde risk yönetimi ve medikolegal problemler”, 4. İstanbul Meme Kanseri Konferansı - Meme Görüntüleme Kursu, 15-17 Nisan 2010, İstanbul. Konferans Notları, 2010; s: 23.

4. Karaarslan B, Şirin Karaarslan E, Çelik S, Ertaş E, Çelik N. 2001-2007 yılları arasında Yüksek Sağlık Şurasında görüşülen diş hekimliğinde malpraktis olgularının değerlendirilmesi. Türkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci. 2010; 16(2): 142-8.

LÜTFEN YAYINLARIMIZA YAPTIGINIZ SİTASYONLARI, SİTASYON FORMU' NU DOLDURARAK BİZE BİLDİRİNİZ. TEŞEKKÜR EDERİZ.
 
 
PLEASE GIVE INFORMATION US BY USING CITATION FORM, IF YOU CITED TO OUR MANUSCRIPTS, THANK YOU.
 

© COPYRIGHT, CELAL BAYAR ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ ADLİ TIP ANABİLİM DALI