PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - D. Clay Kelly
AU  - Gina Manguno-Mire
TI  - Commentary: <em>Helling v. Carey</em>, <em>Caveat Medicus</em>
DP  - 2008 Sep 01
TA  - Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
PG  - 306--309
VI  - 36
IP  - 3
4099  - http://jaapl.org/content/36/3/306.short
4100  - http://jaapl.org/content/36/3/306.full
SO  - J Am Acad Psychiatry Law2008 Sep 01; 36
AB  - Forensic experts should be aware of the increasing importance of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in various legal settings. CPGs are a type of learned treatise and are accepted into court proceedings under hearsay exception provisions. The courts now use CPGs as shorthand for the standard of care in making malpractice determinations. However, medical guidelines can function as a sword or a shield in the courtroom arena. The Helling v. Carey medical malpractice case serves as a frightful reminder of the potential consequences of allowing courts to craft their own standards of medical care.