2005 issue 4


Volume 14, issue 4

Case report

Attitudes of psychiatrists - expert and non-expert

Danuta Hajdukiewicz1
1. Klinika Psychiatrii Sądowej Instytutu Psychiatrii i Neurologii w Warszawie
Postępy Psychiatrii i Neurologii 2005; 14 (4): 367-383
Keywords: unauthorized medical opinion, appropriation of competences of court experts in psychiatry


Objectives. In recent years increasingly more attempts to influence court decisions have been made by unauthorized persons. The aim of the paper is to draw attention of psychiatrists and lawyers to inappropriate behavior of psychiatrists, in that number court experts, accused by mass media offrequently conscious and purposeful attestation of an untruth.

Cases. Examples are presented of attitudes of psychiatrists acting in various capacities (as court experts, treatment providers, scientific authorities, supervisors ofprofessional liability), as well as situations where competences of court experts in psychiatry were infringed by unauthorized diagnostic and psychiatric court opinions (concerning accountability or a high probability of recurrence of an act of social danger).

Commentary. It seems that if various medical certificates or other documents (irrespective of their author) were more critically assessed by the court, and not put on a par with expertise issued by reliable court experts in psychiatry, it would prevent the intended gains.

Address for correspondence:
Dr Danuta Hajdukiewicz, Klinika Psychiatrii Sądowej Instytutu Psychiatrii i Neurologii,
ul. Sobieskiego 9, 02-957 Warszawa