Administrative Law Adjudications Involving Healthcare Professionals: Mental Health Expert Testimony

By Meyer, Donald J.; Drogin, Eric Y. | Journal of Psychiatry & Law, Fall 2011 | Go to article overview

Administrative Law Adjudications Involving Healthcare Professionals: Mental Health Expert Testimony


Meyer, Donald J., Drogin, Eric Y., Journal of Psychiatry & Law


Mental health experts are often needed to provide expert testimony about a respondent healthcare professional's retrospective mental state and prospective fitness for duty. This calls for the expert to parse the degree to which educational deficiency and mental illness were substantial contributing factors to any alleged past misconduct, and to offer recommendations for prospective mental health treatment and educational and supervisory remediation of any diagnosed disorders or deficiencies. Unlike adjudication of malpractice-in which the goal is to make an injured party whole by financial compensation for negligent harm-the goal of administrative agency investigation, adjudication, and peer review is to protect the public by serving as an overseer of the quality of the profession. Health care agency investigators and finders of fact require mental health experts who can discern applicable standards of care and procedure and who can offer opinions that may differ in nature substantially from those typically required in ordinary malpractice litigation.

Key WORDS: Administrative law, expert witnesses, healthcare professionals, malpractice.

Mental health experts may be called upon to examine healthcare professionals - in this context, "respondents" - who are defending themselves against complaints of alleged misconduct. Such complaints are submitted to healthcare or other governmental agencies that have jurisdictional oversight authority for the respondent, and some allegations of misconduct may implicate the healthcare professional's mental state.

This legal landscape differs substantially from that of both civil and criminal legal arenas in which mental health experts may be familiar with providing expert reports and trial testimony. For one thing, healthcare agencies increasingly have mandated a level of interprofessional collaboration and civility unparalleled in other professions (American Medical Association, 2000; Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine, 2001).

With the passage of the Healthcare Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (HCQIA), "peer review" in healthcare was transformed from a lay expression to a legal term of art, replete with federal statutory definitions (42 U.S.C. § 11112 1986). HCQIA - best known for the creation of the National Practitioner Data Bank (Guirguis-Blake, Fryer, Phillips, Szabat, & Green, 2006) - also inducted a panoply of health care agencies to be part of Congress' proposed remedy for the frequency of malpractice, given the observation that "the increasing occurrence of medical malpractice and the need to improve the quality of medical care have become nationwide problems that warrant greater efforts than those that can be undertaken by any individual State" (42 U.S.C. § 11101 1986). In an effort to increase the oversight of healthcare and its practitioners, Congress chose to create an administrative law network with "peer review" authority and reporting responsibility regarding each respective organization's members.

The legal bases of healthcare "peer review"

HCQIA defines healthcare "peer review" as a "professional review action" - specifically, "an action or recommendation of a professional review body which is taken or made in the conduct of professional review activity, which is based on the competence or professional conduct of an individual physician (which conduct affects or could affect adversely the health or welfare of a patient or patients), and which affects (or may affect) adversely the clinical privileges, or membership in a professional society, of the physician" (42 U.S.C. § 11151 1986).

HCQIA also establishes the minimal due process provided for a respondent by an investigating agency. The most important elements of HCQIA's due process definitions are that the peer review in question must be conducted (a) in the reasonable belief that the action was to promote quality healthcare; (b) after a reasonable effort to obtain the facts; (c) after adequate notice (including notice of the reasons for the action and a list of the witnesses, if any, expected to testify at the hearing on behalf of the professional review body) and adequate notice of the hearing and hearing procedures; (d) in the reasonable belief that action was warranted by the facts known; and (e) with an understanding that the respondent can be represented by an attorney, present evidence, and call, examine and cross-examine witnesses before a neutral hearing officer (42 U. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Administrative Law Adjudications Involving Healthcare Professionals: Mental Health Expert Testimony
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.