Featured Articles – Expert Witness Features – page 32

A rare expert – the consultant neuropsychiatrist

Neuropsychiatrists, as all psychiatrists, are medically qualified doctors. They have a special interest in the diagnosis and treatment of clinical conditions that have something to do with physical or organic disorders of the brain.

These can include brain trauma, either blunt or penetrating; the psychiatric effects of strokes and epilepsy, as well as neurodegenerative disorders such as some forms of dementia (though usually not Alzheimer’s disease and other disorders of old age

Legal answers in neonatal ophthalmology

The number of medico legal problems that are arising these days in dealing with infants under one year of age generally fall into two categories – retinopathy of prematurity and shaken baby syndrome. In addition, ophthalmologists are often asked to assess the vision and visual systems in infants who have suffered from birth trauma or birth damage.

A dangerous liaison: asbestos and the lung

Asbestos is a group of toxic but naturally occurring fibers used for a variety of purposes, in particular for the construction industry.

As a consequence, many were exposed to this dangerous substance through the course of their work. Whilst exposure to asbestos has now dramatically reduced, the consequences of exposure in previous decades are now at a peak due to a long latent period between exposure and disease onset.

Experts track down the cause

Most road traffic accident compensation involves two drivers, with a driver or passenger from the one vehicle seeking compensation from the driver of the second vehicle.

Based on evidence that the accident was caused through negligence, the road traffic accident compensation claim will lead to legal proceedings that Experts track down the cause will involve the driver and possibly, passengers of both vehicles claiming injury as a result of the negligent driving on one the parties behalf.

Arbitration: technically the way forward

No matter how hard they try, most of our judges just can’t hope to understand the detailed arguments in technology-based cases. Expecting them to deal with spalling bricks in a construction dispute one day and the internals of computer chips the next is simply asking too much.

While judges might know the law, they can’t hope to apply it fairly without getting the technical aspects of the case right. The result, as any technical expert witness will tell you, has been some very questionable judgements based on unfortunate misunderstandings of technical issues.