However, if that same physician testified as an expert witness that the appropriate treatment for diabetic coma was glucose, until now there would be no disciplinary mechanism to punish the doctor and protect the integrity of the court system. The AMA's policy on expert physician testimony is clear. As a citizen and as a professional with special training and experience, the physician has an ethical obligation to assist with the administration of justice, The medical witness must not become an advocate or a partisan in the legal proceeding, The medical witness should be adequately prepared and should testify honestly and truthfully, The attorney for the party who calls the physician as a witness should be informed of all favorable and unfavorable information developed by the physician's evaluation of the case, and It is unethical for a physician to accept compensation that is contingent upon the outcome of the litigation. Generally, there is an economic incentive to do so. Income derived from expert witness testimony can be substantial.
Economic incentives can color the nature of the physician expert's testimony.
David L. Chadwick and Henry F. Krous, demonstrates that physicians as professionals have tremendous responsibilities, as do the trial judges, to ensure that scientifically valid information is considered in the judicial process. The article presents several examples wherein physicians misquoted standard journals and texts, made false statements, and deliberately omitted important facts and knowledge as it pertained to the expert opinion offered. Physicians who engage in such conduct lead to poor decision-making by our judges and juries. Expert witness testimony should be an objective resource to these persons. The AMA estimates that physicians testify as expert witnesses in nearly half of all federal civil trials, making physicians the largest group of expert witnesses.