桥梁过远:新的美国医疗事故重述的实践指南。

IF 0.5 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW
American Journal of Law & Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-08 DOI:10.1017/amj.2025.16
Larry S Stewart, Robert S Peck
{"title":"桥梁过远:新的美国医疗事故重述的实践指南。","authors":"Larry S Stewart, Robert S Peck","doi":"10.1017/amj.2025.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The new American Law Institute Medical Malpractice Restatement posits a novel rule in § 6(b) that would authorize the use of medical-practice guidelines as a standard of care for medical-malpractice litigation. However, it would only be a \"safe harbor\" shield; guidelines could not be similarly used by plaintiffs as a sword. For defendants, the rule would transform what heretofore has been indisputably hearsay evidence into prima facie proof that would serve as a substitute for expert testimony, and which would be sufficient to defeat a malpractice claim. Plaintiffs wishing to use practice guidelines would be relegated to the \"learned treatise\" exception of the hearsay rule.</p>","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"51 1","pages":"1-26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A BRIDGE TOO FAR: Practice Guidelines in the New ALI Medical Malpractice Restatement.\",\"authors\":\"Larry S Stewart, Robert S Peck\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/amj.2025.16\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The new American Law Institute Medical Malpractice Restatement posits a novel rule in § 6(b) that would authorize the use of medical-practice guidelines as a standard of care for medical-malpractice litigation. However, it would only be a \\\"safe harbor\\\" shield; guidelines could not be similarly used by plaintiffs as a sword. For defendants, the rule would transform what heretofore has been indisputably hearsay evidence into prima facie proof that would serve as a substitute for expert testimony, and which would be sufficient to defeat a malpractice claim. Plaintiffs wishing to use practice guidelines would be relegated to the \\\"learned treatise\\\" exception of the hearsay rule.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Law & Medicine\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"1-26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Law & Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/amj.2025.16\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/amj.2025.16","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

新的美国法律协会医疗事故重述在§6(b)中提出了一项新规则,该规则将授权使用医疗实践指南作为医疗事故诉讼的护理标准。然而,这只会是一个“安全港”盾牌;原告不能同样地将指导方针用作利剑。对于被告而言,该规则将把迄今为止无可争议的道听途说证据转变为初步证据,以替代专家证词,并足以击败医疗事故索赔。希望使用实践指南的原告将被归入传闻规则的“学术论文”例外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A BRIDGE TOO FAR: Practice Guidelines in the New ALI Medical Malpractice Restatement.

The new American Law Institute Medical Malpractice Restatement posits a novel rule in § 6(b) that would authorize the use of medical-practice guidelines as a standard of care for medical-malpractice litigation. However, it would only be a "safe harbor" shield; guidelines could not be similarly used by plaintiffs as a sword. For defendants, the rule would transform what heretofore has been indisputably hearsay evidence into prima facie proof that would serve as a substitute for expert testimony, and which would be sufficient to defeat a malpractice claim. Plaintiffs wishing to use practice guidelines would be relegated to the "learned treatise" exception of the hearsay rule.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
16.70%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: desde Enero 2004 Último Numero: Octubre 2008 AJLM will solicit blind comments from expert peer reviewers, including faculty members of our editorial board, as well as from other preeminent health law and public policy academics and professionals from across the country and around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信