Advocacy and Health Policy
Home Page Members Only Table of Contents Search This Site Contact Us Site Index
ACS Cross Country

Comparison of ACS and AMA Policies on Expert Witness
Qualifications and Guidelines

QUALIFICATIONS
ACS
AMA
Licensure Valid license in state where practicing Licensed in state where case is filed or some other state; medical boards should provide temporary license for expert witnesses
Board Certification Must be Board Certified by an ABMS-recognized board Should be certified. If certified, must be an ABMS-recognized board having acknowledged expertise and training directly related to issue at hand
Experience/Specialty Appropriate to subject matter of case; have experience or demonstrated competence in subject of the case Must be trained/experienced in same discipline or school of practice as defendant
Clinical Practice Active practice of the specialty or subject matter of the case during time the testimony or opinion is provided; familiarity with standard of care at the time of the occurrence Active practice within 5 years of date of occurrence; or substantial time devoted to teaching at accredited med school or university-based research in medical care and type of treatment at issue
CME Should demonstrate evidence of CME relevant to specialty or subject matter of the case NA
Compensation and Frequency Document % of time serving as expert witness; disclose amount of fees or compensation; total number of times has testified for plaintiff or defendant No contingency fee allowed; can be cross-examined for amount of compensation, frequency of expert witness activities, % time devoted and income derived from expert witness activities, and frequency of testimony for plaintiff or defendant
GUIDELINES
ACS GUIDELINES
AMA POLICY
Medical Information Review/testify to content fairly, honestly, and in balanced manner; when drawing inference or opinion from facts of case, should apply same standards of fairness/honesty Testify honestly and truthfully; should not be an advocate or a partisan in the legal proceeding
Negligence Distinguish between negligence and unfortunate medical outcome
Standards of Care Review standards of practice at time of alleged incident
Foundation of Testimony Indicate basis of testimony or opinion - personal experience, specific clinical references, evidence-based guidelines or generally accepted opinion in the specialty; discuss alternate methods and views Should be based on widely accepted theories of medical science or theories supported by a respectable minority of experts in the field at issue; Should be subject to peer review
Compensation Reasonable and commensurate with time and effort given; unethical to link compensation to case outcome Unethical to accept compensation contingent upon outcome of litigation
Truthfulness Ethically and legally obligated to tell the truth; testimony and depositions subject to independent peer review Condemns false testimony; supports peer review process for expert witnesses; should be disciplined by medical boards and state/county medical societies

Online December 18, 2003

ACS Cross Country

Advocacy and Health Policy

 


This page and all contents are Copyright © 2003
by the American College of Surgeons, Chicago, IL 60611-3211