Docstoc

Legal_Issues

Document Sample
Legal_Issues Powered By Docstoc
					              Legal

As of 20Mar08. These questions are
more relevant to the written exams
than the oral.
             Malpractice
Q. What degree of evidence is needed to
 decide malpractice suits?
             Malpractice
Ans. Preponderance of the evidence.
 [Basically, much less than criminal cases,
 “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Only 51% of
 the evidence supports a verdict to decide
 a malpractice case.]
       Hendricks v. Kansas
Q. Hendricks v. Kansas applied to what?
        Hendricks v. Kansas
Ans. Supreme Court decision that endorsed
 Kansas policy to transfer dangerous sex
 offenders to psychiatric hospitals on
 expiration of their prison sentence.



{117 S. Ct. 2072 (1997)}
        National Data Bank
Q. What can lead a physician to be listed on
 the National Data Bank?
         National Data Bank
Ans. A hospital, healthcare organization,
 APA, etc. takes a disciplinary action
 against the physician, for a penalty period
 of more than 30 days. Thus, in theory, at
 least, if you are suspended by your
 hospital until your discharge records are
 completed, they would not report you if
 you got them completed in a month.
Ref: Sadock & Kaplan’s Synopsis
                Tarasoff I
Q. Basically, Tarasoff I requires?
                Tarasoff I
Ans. A duty to warn a potential victim when
 you are treating a pt who you find has
 plans to harm someone specifically.

[1976. A California decision, so does not
  pertain to all states. The “I” may not be
  part of the question.]
                Tarasoff II
Q. What is Tarasoff II?
                Tarasoff II
Ans. Not only to warn, but to take actions to
 protect the potential victim.

[California decision of 1982, so does not
  pertain to all states.]
          Right of privileged
Q. The right of privileged communication is a
 right that belongs to whom?
          Right of privilege
Ans. The pt.




Sadock & Kaplan
        Rouse v. Cameron
Q. What was the Rouse v. Cameron
 decision about?
         Rouse v. Cameron
Ans. First, 1966, right to treatment decision.
 Only pertains to the District of Columbia.
Other Right to Treatment Decisions
• Q. Name two other major right to
  treatment decisions, one in Alabama,
  1971, and one before the Supreme Court,
  1976?
Other Right to Treatment Decisions
Ans.
 1971, Wyatt v. Stickney

 1976, O.Connor v. Donaldson
         Lake v. Cameron
Q. What was the Lake v. Cameron decision
 about?
           Lake v. Cameron
Ans. First “least restrictive setting,” a federal
 decision that only pertained to DC, 1966.
 Decision said that one could not place a pt
 into a hospital involuntarily until it has
 been shown that a least restrictive
 alternative was not available.
                  battery
Q. Legally, what is battery?
                 battery
Ans. For physicians, touching a pt before the
 pt has agreed to be touched.




Sadock and Kaplan.
        Types of Witnesses
Q. What are the two types of witnesses in
 the court that pertain to psychiatrists?
        Types of Witnesses
Ans.
 Fact Witness: What one saw of heard, not
 rending an opinion. Includes reading a
 medical record to the court so that the
 court has that info.
 Expert Witness: Can draw conclusions,
 such as the patient is dangerous to self or
 others.
   Competency to Stand Trial
Q. Supreme Court, Dusky v. United States,
 set standard for determining competency
 to stand trial. Roughly, what was the
 wording?
    Competency to Stand Trial
Ans. The person “has sufficient present
 ability to consult with his lawyer with a
 reasonable degree of rational
 understanding – and whether he has a
 rational as well as factual understanding of
 the proceeding against him.”
                 NGBRI
Q. What is the Model Penal Code’s wording
 as to a person being found nor guilty of by
 reason of insanity?
                 NGBRI
Ans.
 “People are not responsible for criminal
 conduct, if, at the time of such conduct, as
 a result of mental illness or defect, they
 lacked substantial capacity either to
 appreciate the criminality [wrongfulness] of
 their conduct
                      OR
See next screen
                  NGBRI
[continued]
Or to inform their conduct to the requirement
  of the law.”
{These two are sometimes referred to as
  “two pronged,” with some authorities
  wanting to eliminate the second. States
  vary in their wording, but most are close to
  this. Not all states allow NGBRI.]

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:3
posted:4/20/2010
language:English
pages:28