Psychiatric malpractice case analysis: Striving for objectivity

Forensic psychiatrists, acting as expert witnesses, must be able to perform objective analyses of psychiatric malpractice cases. Accurate malpractice case analysis requires careful attention to relevant legal concepts and consideration of potential biasing influences. If forensic psychiatrists are to avoid a reliance on “experts policing experts, ” individual forensic psychiatrists must be fully prepared to police themselves by recognizing and avoiding certain errors in malpractice case analysis. Any effort to improve objectivity must include a clear understanding of the confounding variables. In this article, the authors discuss some potential impediments to objective analysis of malpractice cases such as the use of the wrong standard, causation, hindsight bias, and contributory negligence. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 34:215–23, 2006 Shortly after his last session with Dr. Liptzin, patient Wendall Williamson elected to stop taking his anti-psychotic medication. Eight months later, his perse-cutory delusions returned in full force. Williamson then took to the streets of Chapel Hill, North Caro-lina, with anM-1 rifle. He was able to kill two strang-ers and wound a police officer before being shot b