RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Commentary: <em>Helling v. Carey</em>, <em>Caveat Medicus</em>
JF Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
JO J Am Acad Psychiatry Law
FD American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
SP 306
OP 309
VO 36
IS 3
A1 Kelly, D. Clay
A1 Manguno-Mire, Gina
YR 2008
UL http://jaapl.org/content/36/3/306.abstract
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.