These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Estimation of incapacity to work in medico-legal opinions given by clinicians and forensic medicine specialists from the Department of Forensic Medicine, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice--comparative analysis].
    Author: Chowaniec C, Jabłoński C, Kobek M, Chowaniec M.
    Journal: Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol; 2005; 55(4):261-3. PubMed ID: 16498964.
    Abstract:
    After amending the rules obligatory for decision making about the incapacity to work and social insurance in district courts observed in the practice of the Department of Forensic Medicine Medical University of Silesia, Katowice. Our Department is usually appointed for a second opinion in legal pension proceedings. In the first place courts appoint physicians being experts in particular fields of clinical medicine. Irrespective of all differences in the accepted conclusion a comparative analysis of medico-legal opinions given by forensic medicine specialists or groups of experts from the Department of Forensic Medicine, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, showed flaws in the way opinions were handed down by individual experts relating to the lack of the state of general health estimation in people contesting for pensions as well as ignorance of the obligatory rules and procedures when deciding about incapacity to work in pension proceedings. It is known that physicians appointed by the court establish only whether the examined person can work or not, but do not give any information about the character of incapacity and do not consider the possibility of therapeutic rehabilitation within the extent of the pension prevention by the Social Insurance Department nor a chance to change ones profession due to the incapacity to work in the present occupation. While presenting their opinions, physicians very often suggest the need of additional opinions given by other physicians being experts in particular fields of clinical medicine. On the basis of the above mentioned remarks the authors show the necessity for greater control over all medico legal opinions and by the court decision making process as well as the verification of experts qualifications taking into consideration of economy and the need to make the proceedings shorter.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]