This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
The authors of “Expert medical testimony: Responsibilities of medical societies” express frustration with the American civil litigation system, particularly (in their opinion) the inability of judges and juries to properly evaluate “expert” medical testimony.1 Based upon my experiences as the current general counsel of the American Academy of Neurology and as a former partner in a law firm that specialized in medical malpractice defense, I understand that frustration.
Our civil litigation system works well if the judges devote their full attention to pretrial, trial, and post-trial proceeding; the trial and defense attorneys are professional advocates for their clients; all expert witnesses are professional, ethical, and knowledgeable; and the juries are impartial, educated, and engaged throughout a usually lengthy and sometimes tedious trial. Unfortunately, this is not a perfect world.
The medical community can attempt to improve the system by advocating for tort reform at federal and state levels. The Academy’s board of directors is now providing substantial financial and staff resources to the recently established Center for Health Policy to advocate on behalf of neurologists. Similarly, the Web sites of the American Medical …
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
