Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 1

PRC#10 ACET 3

Recommendations for Certification and Training of

Medicolegal Death Investigator Personnel

Public Comment Report

Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Review and Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013

Total responses received = 19

53% endorsed the draft as is. (11% did not indicate either way)

Comments received from 13 individuals and 2 organizations (National Association of Medical 

Examiners NAME and American Association of Tissue Banks AATB). 

Commenter #1 

Forensic Pathologists trained by accredited Residency Programs and Forensic Pathology 

Fellowships are qualified to testify as expert witnesses solely by means of their training and 

experience.

In the past, the ABP allowed those individuals to take only the Forensic Pathology 

Certification examination. In the relatively recent past they decided to prevent those highly 

specialized physicians from taking that exam until they first passed the Anatomic Pathology 

Certification examination.

It is commonly discussed among Pathologists that the Anatomic Pathology Board Certification 

exam is no longer a GENERAL certificate. It has effectively become a Surgical Pathology 

SUBSPECIALTY Certificate, unpassable by the majority of Forensic pathologists. Indeed, the 

majority of the Anatomic Pathology examination is applicable only to the practice of Surgical 

Pathology and has no relevance to the Practice of Forensic Pathology.

An analogy would be if the American Board of Internal Medicine forced Gastroenterologists 

to first obtain the Critical Care Medicine Certificate before being allowed to take the GI board 

exam.

The ABP should be forced to allow fully trained Forensic Pathologists to take ONE Forensic 

Pathology Examination that includes only the Anatomic Pathology subject matter that applies 

to autopsy and forensic pathology. (As was practice in the past.)

This option should be provided to both new graduates and currently practicing Forensic Pathologists.
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 2

Response: Currently, the committee has no empirical data to support this recommended 

change. No change made to the document.

Commenter # 2 

Missing is the basic necessary minimum academic standard for employment. There needs to 

be a statement that job descriptions in all areas including supervision must have a minimum 

academic standard for starting employment. I don't care what you set; I don't even care if you 

set it so that a high school diploma is not required, but you have to start somewhere so that it 

can be on the table as a discussion for the one thing most necessary with FSAB: basic 

illiteracy. All of the training programs, for coroners and ME investigators alike, should require 

some diploma before accepting a trainee for certification. We could certainly argue about 

what the diploma should include, but something needs to be here to start the discussion. I 

would like to see data on the academic credential of the current workforce, and a breakdown 

of those credentials by ME and coroner offices. I would like to see data on elected coroner 

education.

Response: Recognized academic degree requirements are addressed in the published ACET 

document #2: Minimal Educational Requirements for Medicolegal Death Investigation 

Personnel. Recommendations for minimum education will be addressed in a future document.

Commenter #3 

General comment: The road to certification particularly in this area is difficult. I suggest an 

entry to certification might be a rather neutral agency such as AAFS with a standing 

committee that reviews a number of issues including experience, standing/past certifications, 

education, employment, qualified references, etc.

Response: The Forensic Specialties Accreditation Board (FSAB) recognizes ABMDI as an 

accredited certifying body. No change needed.

Commenter #4 

I wholeheartedly endorse the accreditation requirements, especially for coroners and other lay 

personnel who deal with forensic issues. 

Arkansas operates under a truly archaic system where all you have to do is win the election 

and be of legal age. If salon personnel are required to seek training and be certified so should 

coroners b/c of the role they play in forensic cases.

Response: No action required.

Commenter #5 
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 3

I believe I have read a lot of rhetoric. Medicolegal death investigators should in fact be 

certified. However in line 51, private, is somewhat incorrect, as private, non ME or coroner 

staff can not be certified. ABMDI requirements state employment, full time, must be in the 

field. We have to be careful to not narrow our pool of employees so much. In my county there 

are 2 people certified, myself and my partner. I have to tell the attorneys to read the internet 

about SUIDI investigations so they know whats going on when we want to use the dolls to re 

interview parents. We could afford to broaden our training scope in my opinion. The check 

book mentality as referred to in line 172, is going to be with us for decades in forensics. Lets 

allow some good part timers to work into the system in these small counties to get some 

people trained. In the past, I have expressed my dislike of the narrow scope of medicolegal 

death investigator training. So many of these investigators have no real world experience. 

Some can't drive a nail, let alone handle a firearm. We are involved in so many real world 

deaths, some outside training is greatly needed. Ironworkers, fireman, policeman, especially 

EMT's are better equipped to do this job better than a class trainee. Thanks

Response: ABMDI certification does not require full-time employment nor does it require 

employment by a government agency. The committee has no authority regarding ABMDI 

requirements. No action required.

Commenter #6 

Very well written document. I do have one question. How do you address when the person 

holds certification as a death investigator but does not do any clinical practice? Do you allow 

continued certification with a certain amount of continuing education hours?

Response: These are the requirements of the certifying body and are not within the authority 

of the recommendations. Each certifying body has their own certification requirements. No 

action required.

Commenter #7 

I fully agree and support a standard for Medicolegal Death Investigators, and them being 

trained, certified, and accrdited where possible. There is no argument that this move would be 

detrimental to the public. I would however, strongly believe that currently certified or licensed 

investigators be gandfathered in, and given ample opportunity to review the new program, it's 

guidelines and content. These professionals currently working in the field, in those smaller 

offices like ours, will face challenges in obtaining this new certification, depending on how it 

is rolled out. Our current educational track for new coroners and deputys is administered 

through our State ME's office. I would highly reccommend that this program be delivered in 

the same manner, through the respective State ME's office.

Thanks for allowing me to comment.

Response: Each certifying body has their own certification requirements. The committee 

encourages the certifying bodies to develop a defined pathway for certification of experienced 
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 4

individuals who do not or are unable to complete the certification requirements. The NAS 

report recommendations state that any practitioner not certified by 2020 cannot provide 

testimony. No action required.

Commenter #8 

I agree certification and accreditation is paramount to the industry. More and more cases are 

being challenged in court and experts are having to justify their opinions. Experts need to be 

current on training, techniques, etc in order for juries to take them seriously. Training, 

certifications, and accreditations needs to be priortized and federal funding sought for those in 

need.

Response: No action required.

Commenter #9 

The Universal Certification for Forensic Personnel is a very positive, innovative and 

mandatory idea. Furthermore, I have a dream to have, one day, a universal code for the 

medico-legal institute worldwide, that obligates the governments to perform that. Many, if not 

all underdeveloped countries including min, Egypt, neglecting up to a very bad extent the 

development of the facilities for the Forensic Medicine, especially the Forensic Pathology ( 

autopsy facilities). That also, includes the planned scientific training for the staff and the 

certification requirements based on learning and tested measures.

Response: No action required.

Commenter #10 

OBJECTIVES

This century demands, yet obliges, for a rapid and efficient responsive organization. Indeed, 

imposes for a knowledge worker who is highly qualified, innovative and can work 

autonomously plus in teamwork. Though globalization well recognized as a market 

phenomenon, it is not so far to find such a specific service offered by the medico-legal institute 

face the question of quality trust from the society or the concerned authorities. It is also, not so 

far, for that service to privatize, replaced with universities or even shared by foreign experts 

with the increasing tendency for countries to remove barriers in a marathon pace. "To deal 

with global competition, employees have to be able to keep up with knowledge and new ideas 

to stay in the race"(Wilpert, 2008).

The medico-legal institute challenged to take a fateful decision for one of two options. The 

first is, to keep the bureaucratic structure with the old vertical, conventional management and 

day-by-day working staff with an "artificial sense of stability"(Nadler&Tushman, 1999). The 

second is, restructure the hierarchy and change the professional staff into knowledge workers. 

As a governmental organization, the vertical hierarchy could modify not totally discarded, 

with practice that is more flexible, lateral coordination communication and cross-functional 
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 5

teams. Flexibility, as it might face some resistance, could approach within the modified 

vertical structure."Flexibility does not necessary to be opposite the structure, but it might make 

the process of organization with the concept of the network and independent access to 

information and decision making"(Toffler, 1995, own translation from an Arabic translation to 

the original text). 

To change the staff into knowledge workers, the organization should adopt research work & 

development of the human capital, activate the partnership with the universities, locally plus 

globally, and motivate "different innovation streams"(Nadler&Tushman, 1999). Only 

organizations with clear vision for future that encourage innovation and codify the concept of 

knowledge workers will survive in the 21st century competition. "The education level of 

employees quantifies their quality and skill, and often used to measure firms human 

capital"(Harison&koski, 2010). The holly bureaucracy, is now replaced by the globalization`s 

paradise or hell

DISCUSSION

INTRODUCTION:

A. "How a single person", in the position of the head of the Medico-Legal Institute "could 

possess combination of leadership skills, managerial talent and specialized 

knowledge?"(Nadler & Tushman,1999).

An obvious problem undermines the performance and threatens the future of such a unique 

organization. It is nonnegotiable that, the portfolio of work of the organization is very 

complex, diversified based on geography and specializations, the branches and advances of the 

forensic sciences. Dealing with multiple authorities and living in the era of media and press 

propaganda, making an extra-load for one person to handle. The vertical shaped hierarchy of 

the organization, the lack of flexibility and proper communication has a great impact. Those 

factors influence the organization speed in decision-making, respond to pressure, anticipate the 

future and impose a design for adoptive structure. 

B. "The education level of the employees quantifies their quality and skills, and often used to 

measure firms human capital"(Harison&koski, 2010). 

The absent, holy obligation for the organization, is to be fully conscious about its human 

capital training, education and assessment. Deterioration starts when development ceases. 

There is great risk for losing the previous domination within the regional competitive capacity. 

Furthermore, with the rapidly changing environment, the stability becomes an illusion. Indeed, 

confidence based on quantity achievement, is an obsolete module. Those concepts and practice 

never make a knowledge worker.

THE BODY:

A- The vertical structure of the organization should modify to achieve the strategic imperatives 

for the future:
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 6

1- The "module of forensic provinces", should be adopted with a "chief forensic medical 

officer, C.F.M.O" (Knight, 1988), to direct each province for speed response and decision 

making especially for routine decisions.

2- The "medico-legal offices" should all become "medico-legal centers" (Zadeh, 2002), to 

adopt with the geographic and multi-specialized diversions (Toxicology, serology and forgery, 

firearm analysis and odontology) for prompt and efficient response, "speed is not only faster 

but different"(Nadler, 1999). That centers will work as a "cross functional team"(Child, 2005).

3- The multi-task responsibilities of the C.F.M.O. obliges for an "executive team of senior, 

soft, staff with high knowledge and insight"(Nadler & Tushman,1999), leaded by that 

C.F.M.O. to take speed decisions and anticipate for the future.

B- "Metrical research and development using different innovation streams"(Nadler & 

Tushman, 1999) should be a fixed imperative and strategy: 

1- "Legal/forensic medicine is an applied science in which experience play a role that is 

difficult to overestimate"(Pollak, 2007). The overestimation of the role of experience should 

change. The partnership with the university should activate. Comparing the role of the 

universities in different nations, there is a wondrous state, here. While the legal medicine in 

Italy and France for example, are similarly contained within the universities (Anon, 1977). 

While in "U.K." (Knight, 1988),"Turkey" (Inanici, 1998) and "Iran" (Zadeh, 2002) practice 

and R&D are based on partnership of professionals and the universities. The result of 

separation is no R&D work by the experts and even the university staff, has only theoretical 

knowledge, which is helpless.

2- "Objections rose already and rightly of the comprehensive competence of the medico-legal 

expert" (Pollak, 2007). Multitask module of the medico-legal expert should be changed. For 

competent organization aiming for speed, efficient performance and competitive innovation, 

"various business models"(Nadler,1999) such as autopsy for criminal cases and court 

testify,clinical forensic medicine and medical malpractice cases, each should specify for 

different team work at a time with rotating "strategic life cycle"(Nadler & Tushman, 1999).

3- A "routine purposeful cannibalism" should conduct upon the non-qualified staff, a real 

human cannibalism. One of the causes of "organizational conflicts are the different values and 

goals"(Nadler & Tushman,1999). The improvement and competence should be the protected 

culture inside the organization.

C- "Organizational competency, a unique factor to make the organization competitive" 

(Byham &Moyer, n.d) in speed and innovation could achieve with the continuous presentation 

of the case reports, the unique character of the forensic medicine.

1- Through "case reports, projective statistical and mathematical models could be created and 

saved as centralized database"(Pollak, 2007) to be accessible for all staff, speed, anticipation 

and rapid response could achieve. 
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 7

2-Organizational competency for speed performance, multitask work, flexibility and 

innovation could achieve by "lateral coordination, communication and coherence, sharing 

information, authority and responsibility" (Child, 2005) in a clear base. 

3-Organizational competency for speed performance could achieve by new system with 

"minimal bureaucracy, as one national jurisdiction that divided administratively with qualified 

coroners that avoids delays in burial"(Hasleton, 2004).

CONCLUSIONS

A- The vertical hierarchical structure of the medico-legal institute, should modify and the 

professionals should be knowledge workers by:

1- Executive team, that works with the C.F.M.O, for speed response, qualified performance 

and anticipation.

2- Medico-legal centers should exist for the diversified geography and specialization with 

cross-functional teams.

3- Integration and lateral coordination, adaptation plus innovation, free access to information 

and direct communication are all bridges for the new competent organization.

4- Research and development, case reports data base, training and continuous education with 

evaluation are all bridges for competent innovative staff.

B-My final opinion is that the medico-legal institute to overcome the challenges of the 

environmental changes, locally and globally should modify the vertical structure by selecting 

an executive skilled team, establishing the province medico legal centers for the 

diversifications in geography and specializations. The relationship between the main center 

and the provinces should be flexible with distributing authorities and sharing responsibilities. 

The partnership with the universities is the mandatory solution for R&D and mutual benefits 

for both parties.

REFERENCES

Anon (1977),' Legal Medicine in Italy', Forensic Science International, 10(1), PP. 42-46, 

ScienceDirect [Online].DOI:10.1016/0300.9432 (77)90045.0. (Accessed: September 4, 2010).

Bennet, A. & Bennet, D.(2009) 'The New Knowledge Worker', Organizational Survival in the 

New World, PP.213-226,ScienceDirect[Oline].DOI:10.1016/b978.0.7506.7712.7.50024-

x.(Accessed: 15 August 2010).

Byham, W. &Moyer, R. (n.d), Using Competencies to Build Successful Organization, USA, 

Development Dimensional International.

Child, J. (2005) Organization: contemporary principles and practice, 1st ed. USA, Blackwell 

Publishing.
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 8

Harison, E. & Koski, H. (2010), 'Applying open innovation in business strategies: Evidence 

from Finnish software firms', Research Policy, 39(3), pp.351-359, ScienceDirect 

[Online].Doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.008. (Accessed: September 4, 2010).

Hasleton, P. (2004),'Reforming the Coroner and death certification service', Current Diagnostic 

Pathology, 10, pp.453-462 ScienceDirect[Online].DOI:10.1016/j.cdip.2004.07.004. (Accessed: 

September 4, 2010). 

Inanici (1998),'Medico-legal death investigation and autopsies in Istanbul, Turkey', Journal of 

Clinical Forensic Medicine, 5, PP.119-123, ScienceDirect [Online].DOI:10.1016/S1353.113 

(98)90029.3. (Accessed: September 4, 2010). 

Knight, B. (1988), A Model Medico-Legal system', Forensic Science International, 39, pp.1-4, 

ScienceDirect [Online].DOI:10.1016/0379-0738 (88)90112-0. (Accessed: September 4, 2010).

Nadler,D.&Tushman,M.(1999)'The organization of the future: Strategic imperatives and core 

competencies for the 21st century', Organizational Dynamics,28(1),pp.45-60, Business Source 

Premier,EBSCO host[Online],(Accessed: September 6, 2010).

Pollak,S. (2007),'Medical Criminalistics', Forensic Science

Response: Many comments seem to be more appropriate for developing and managing a 

medicolegal death investigation center. No action required.

Commenter # 11 

18. Instead of reasonable time, should have actual time period such as 6 months. Reasonable 

allows to much subjectivity.

232. (should) should be changes to (shall), would give more value to the statement.

additional comment: I would like to see a recommendation of state certification for MDI 

addressed as well.

Even if it mirrors ABDMI Certification as it would allow for more accountability.

Response: Providing a specific time frame for certification sounds reasonable but gets tricky. 

A full-time investigator in a busy office can meet requirements in a specific time period, but a 

part-time investigator may need a longer time frame. Will change document to read: “ As 

soon as the employee is eligible, as per the requirements of their certifying organization.”

Agree to change should to shall.

SWGMDI is recommending national standards, not state standards. A sentence shall be added 

recommending that states should comply with national standards.
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 9

Commenter #12 

I just want to point out a couple of issues, that I think can enhance this communication. These 

are general comments and not edits for specific lines in the document. 

Under significant challenges, of all the accreditation boards, none of them appear to be all 

inclusive, providing a standard or base from which to build to meet the recommendation. 

Some states have made different requirements to be a be a medicolegal death investigator. 

certification in ABMDI is voluntary in Ohio and most other states.

All states must require a minimum (standard) of training! Perhaps that could be where the 

elusive basis for a minimum standard could be constructed for the sake of being consistent. 

Would it be appropriate to include a few of these items in the recommendations?

Response: A sentence will be added recommending that states should comply with national 

standards.

Commenter #13 

In regards to Line 138 Recommendations -

Inclusion of SOMDI? I feel that they are in thier infancy but could be a resource for Death 

Investigators

Response: SOMDI is a membership organization, not a certifying body. No action required.

Commenter #14 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments.

The American Association of Tissue Banks (AATB) is making these recommendations to 

ensure that a balanced overview of organ, tissue and eye donation and transplantation is 

addressed in the training and certification of medicolegal death investigation personnel. A 

balanced approach, covering both local and national donation and transplantation information, 

should provide personnel with a useful working knowledge of donation opportunities and 

medical therapy options for members of the public who need them. Thank you for seriously 

considering the importance of including organ, tissue and eye donation and transplantation as 

part of uniform death investigator training programs. 

Regarding lines 93 and 94 of the Background section where it states that “Medicolegal death 

investigations impact public health, public safety and families,” we recommend that, because 

organ, eye and tissue donation are a matter of public health and impacts families, we propose 

that a statement be added immediately after this to continue to describe the impact:

“Organ, Tissue and Eye (OTE) donation are significant components of the impact to public 

health involving medicolegal death investigations. National certification programs must 
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 10

include a requirement that an OTE component be offered as part of the curriculum. It’s also 

strongly recommended that medicolegal personnel be cross-trained by the local OTE 

organization(s) in a mutually agreeable manner to review the donation activities within their 

jurisdiction. At a minimum, content should include information about the community impact 

of donation and clinical applications of organs, tissue, and ocular grafts that provide relief for 

those in need.”

Regarding the Recommendation section, we propose to add a new sentence between lines 199 

and 200: 

“The American Association of Tissue Banks (AATB), the Eye Bank Association of America 

(EBAA), and the Association of Organ Procurement Organizations (AOPO) are wellestablished, professional authorities willing to collaborate on national standards and 

educational materials or programs that can be used for medicolegal curriculums about 

donation and transplantation.”

Response: The content of certification and training is not being addressed by this report,

therefore, no further action is required.

Commenter #15 

General Comments

NAME acknowledges, and generally supports and concurs with the document and its 

recommendations that medicolegal death investigation personnel receive various forms of 

training and be individually board certified. (A)

NAME agrees with, and wishes to emphasize, recognition of the American Board of 

Pathology (ABP) as the appropriate board for certification of pathologists involved in 

medicolegal (forensic) death investigations and the American Board of Medicolegal Death 

Investigators (ABMDI) for non-forensic pathologist personnel involved in medicolegal death 

investigations. (B)

While the document directly addresses individual certification by the ABP and ABMDI, 

certification of other individuals that may be involved in forensic death investigations should

be specifically addressed. (C)

The document recommends that medicolegal death investigators be educated and trained. The 

recommendation that training programs should be approved for continuing education by 

professional agencies, such as the American Medical Association (AMA), American Bar 

Association (ABA), American nursing Association (ANA), ABMDI, etc. to ensure that they 

meet rigorous training standards is also given. NAME agrees with both. However, the 

document could be vastly improved by providing specific and practical recommendations for 

what the education and training should be. The document strays from the purpose defined by 

its title, and devotes most of the discussion to other areas such as obstacles, employment 

status, funding, ethics, and accreditation. If these other areas are to be discussed in this 

particular document, they should each be individually addressed with direct ties to training and 

certification recommendations. (D)
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 11

NAME has a longstanding rigorous program of office/system/facility inspection and 

accreditation, the roots of which date back to the 1960’s. NAME accreditation should be 

recognized as the “gold standard” – NAME accreditation was specifically mentioned in the 

National Research Council’s “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path 

Forward” report in 2009. NAME acknowledges that the International Association of Coroners 

and Medical Examiners (IACME) has started an accreditation program of its own. However, 

the document should not suggest or imply that the IACME accreditation program uses 

standards equivalent to NAME – it does not. (E)

It is suggested that the affiliations/positions of the SWGMI committee members be stated in 

the document or a parent document. (F)

The document would be more useful if it included specific and practical suggestions as to 

where the money to pay for training, certification, accreditation, and professional memberships 

should come from. (G)

Recommended Additions

Forensic pathologists should be licensed to practice medicine in all of the jurisdictions in 

which they perform an autopsy, and they need to meet continuing medical education 

requirements for medical licensure. (H)

Consultants in medicolegal death investigations (e.g. forensic anthropologists, forensic 

toxicologists, forensic odontologists, neuropathologists, radiologists, pediatricians, etc.) should 

be board certified in their respective fields. (I)

Specific and practical recommendations regarding types of training and training programs that 

are needed, and their funding sources should be included. Examples include the following:

• There should be continued federal funding for the training of forensic pathology 

fellows in criminalistics (crime laboratory techniques and procedures and interpretation) at a 

national center each year. (J)

• There should be a continuing effort at the national level, with federal funding, for the 

development of medicolegal death investigation training materials and for the operation of 

training programs such as the “Every Scene, Every Time” project and the Sudden Unexplained 

Infant Death (SUID) National Training Academies. (K)

• It should be recognized that crime investigation and death investigation, while 

overlapping at times, are different areas that have different training and certification needs. 

Further it must be recognized that outside the military, there is no federal death investigation 

jurisdiction, and that the authority to conduct forensic death investigations is granted by state 

laws (or district or territory), not federal law. In view of these considerations, there should be 

state funding (or district or territory) for programs to train all medicolegal death investigators 

regarding the governing laws in their particular jurisdiction and the practical application of 

those laws to death investigations (e.g., jurisdiction, death registration, disposition of human 
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 12

remains, handling of evidence, public health requirements, public records acts, and court room 

procedures, etc.). (L)

• Offices and agencies should manage scheduling to routinely allow personnel time for 

training and continuing education. (M)

• Offices and agencies should, as a start, offer incentive pay for individuals to obtain and 

maintain certification, while moving in the direction of required certification. (N)

• There should be ongoing federal funding to develop on-line (internet) interactive 

training programs for basic and advanced medicolegal death investigation, and education 

modules for maintenance of certifications. (O)

• There should be local, state, and federal cooperation and funding to develop regional 

training centers in medical examiner offices that have strong academic/university ties that 

could provide practical in-person “hands-on” supervised experience, workshops, lecture series, 

and research opportunities. (P)

Specific Line Item Comments

It would be best to not refer to lay individuals involved in medicolegal death investigation as 

“forensic scientists” (lines31 and 32 of the document). Lay individuals are rarely involved in 

the scientific process, making the statement misleading -better to use terms such as 

“personnel’ or “practitioners.” (Q)

The term “Prosecutor-coroner” should be added to the list of types of medicolegal death 

investigation jurisdictions (in the paragraph beginning with line 66). Following that line, it 

should be stated that in some jurisdictions, a prosecuting attorney (or district attorney or 

similar title) has authority to order an autopsy, and therefore may significantly influence the 

forensic death investigation process, and that such individuals would benefit from medicolegal 

death investigation training beyond what they may have learned in law school. (R)

The document should either better describe the methodology and results of the survey 

(presented in lines 99 - 136), or delete the survey discussion altogether. There is concern that 

surveys of this nature may contain significant bias rather than widely accepted viewpoints (a 

35% response is reported). The survey as currently presented in the document does not add 

much to the discussion (other than making it seem as if the recommendations are based on 

something scientific). (S)

The document states: “Forensic pathologists should be certified by the American Board of 

Pathology, with a subspecialty in anatomic pathology and board certification in forensic 

pathology” [lines 229-230]. This should be changed to “Forensic pathologists should be 

certified by the American Board of Pathology (ABP) in anatomic pathology and forensic 

pathology.” This fits better with how the American Board of Pathology approaches 

certification –anatomic pathology is a “primary” certificate and forensic pathology is a 

“subspecialty” certificate, with primary certification being required by the ABP in order to 

hold a subspecialty certification. (T)
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 13

Response: Due to the length of this comment, each paragraph was assigned a letter to 

correspond with the response for ease of reading.

(A ) No action required.

(B) No action required.

(C) There are no other certifications for individuals other than Forensic Pathologists and 

Medicolegal Death Investigators. Currently, Forensic Autopsy Technicians do not have a 

certifying body. A sentence will be added encouraging the development of discipline specific 

certifications, similar to ABMDI.

(D) Revisions throughout the document based on public comment address these issues. 

(E) The existing accreditation programs recognize and support certification and training for 

personnel involved with medicolegal death investigation. No further action required.

(F) The affiliations and positions of the committee members are posted on SWGMDI.org. 

(G) Although grant funding has been available and relied upon for accreditation, training, 

continuing education and maintenance, it is recommended that a level of fixed funding be 

incorporated into the permanent budget. In addition, scheduling of job duties shall include 

time to attend these opportunities. Further, the budget should include provision to 

incorporate incentive pay for current employees to establish and maintain certification.

(H) To meet continuing education medical education requirements is beyond the scope of this 

document. No action needed.

( I) This is addressed by accreditation standards. The document supports accreditation of 

medicolegal offices, as denoted in individual accreditation standards promulgated by NAME 

and IAC & ME. 

( J) The committee is not aware that “continued” federal funding is available; it is inconsistent 

and fluctuates. The committee recommends that the ACGME look at fellowship training 

programs for possible inclusion of specific mdi practices as a part of the fellowship training 

program. No action needed.

( K) This recommendation will be incorporated into the document.

( L) By mentioning ABMDI certification, the report acknowledges the difference between 

crime scene investigation and medicolegal death investigation. ABMDI application criteria is

for medicolegal death investigators only. No action required.

The comment stating “outside of the military, there is no federal death investigation 

jurisdiction..” is incorrect as tribal jurisdictions exist. 
Created by SWGMDI's ACET Committee 

Open for Public Comment March 25 to May 25, 2013 Page 14

While the committee agrees that training is necessary to the practical application of laws to 

death investigation, this should occur when one begins employment and should not require 

funding. No action required.

(M) This is alluded to in the document but will be further clarified.

(N) Budget and scheduled time allotted for personnel will address this. The report 

recommends incentive pay be offered to obtain and maintain certification.

(O) There are currently multiple opportunities for free continuing education opportunities 

funded by federal grants. The document will recommend that these offerings continue.

(P) This is addressed in the Regional Center document but will be incorporated into this 

document as well.

(Q) “Lay individuals” will be removed from the document.

(R) It is not necessary to add “prosecutor-coroner” as the sentence already says certain people 

“including” the more common ones.

The committee agrees that other groups involved in death investigation should receive training 

but there is no certification avenue for them. 

No action required.

(S) The survey discussion will be removed from the report as it was to assist the committee 

and is not “research” to support recommendations.

(T) This will be incorporated into the document.