Expert physician testimony as to standard of care is common in malpractice trials. It is one type of evidence to help a judge or jury determine the standard of knowledge and skill to impose upon the defendant-physician. To encompass different schools of thought in a field, courts have allowed a physician following a minority-view school to be judged against tenets of that school 9 . However, as medical practices become more standardized, this is diminishing as an acceptable legal approach. Use of expert witnesses is an essential tool of attorneys on both sides of a case.
Experts receive compensation for their time input on case reviews, depositions or court appearances.
Our adversarial system directs that the party who hires the experts pays them. This can lead to biased opinions. Apart from bias, the expert's demeanor and confidence may carry the case, rather than objective, decisional analysis. Here is an example. In a 1990 medical malpractice case study by Samuel Weir, a team of physicians compared experts' opinions as to appropriate diagnostic methods and treatments for a coronary artery disease patient.