|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: FYI - the Daubert case/conceptFrom: Heidi (heidi@nybble.net)Sun Mar 21 13:10:04 2004
> Also realize: Daubert is not only for medical cases - it's for ALL > experts. So if you have a lawsuit about your car, an "expert" mechanic has > to meet the Daubert qualifications. If you have a plumber problem, the > plumbing "expert" has to pass muster, too. Anyone who's an expert, from > nuclear rocket scientists to police radar experts, has to base their > "opinion" on scientific fact, not their own feelings/opinion. Damn, I must just watch too much Law & Order or something. ;) The one thing that has always puzzled me about 'expert witnesses' in trials is the fact that as a whole the legal system seems to be based so solidly on 'precedent' which is akin to 'research' in my head. I've never understood how a system that requires its lawyers to argue their cases based on prior cases (not on opinion or, "I've been a lawyer for 46 years!") seems to allow the witnesses to just opine away. I'm glad to know that this is changing.
-- Heidi
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Sat Aug 2 04:43:09 2008 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.