YEAR	MALPRACTICE	AUTHOR	SOURCE	SELECTION	ABSTRACT
2009	Special topics in psychiatric malpractice	Carla Rodgers MD	psychiatry journal	8107	This article will review the basic legal underpinnings of malpractice and then focus on special topics. In the lectures on malpractice the author has given over the past ten years, the same questions keep coming up, from attending and residents as well. What is the effect on HIPAA on psychiatric confidentiality? What is the prescribing psychiatrist s liability in split treatment, also known as collaborative care? What is the liability for psychiatric supervision, and consultation to other psychiatrists? Finally, how should one handle telephone and online communication with patients to be responsive but still limit liability? This article will attempt to elucidate and answer these questions.
2009	Psychiatric malpractice exposure-separating fact from fiction	Donna Vanderpool MBA JD Eric Fine MD	Psychiatry CD	10564	Psychiatrists are appropriately concerned about their malpractice exposure, however, psychiatrists perceptions of their malpractice risk may not match the reality of such risk. Psychiatrists may overestimate their actual chances of being sued as well as the chance and implication of an excess verdict. Sources of psychiatric malpractice liability, including psychopharmacology and treating patients with suicidal behavior, will be discussed. The best way for psychiatrists to minimize their liability exposure is to provide good clinical care. Three proven risk management strategies to support psychiatrists in doing what s best for their patients by delivering good clinical care will be presented information gathering, communication, and documentation. Vignettes from forensic evaluations will be included. Donna Vanderpool, MBA, J.D. is the Assistant Vice President of Risk Management at PRMS, Inc. in Arlington, Virginia. Eric W. Fine, M.D. is engaged in the private practice of clinical and forensic psychiatry in Philadelphia. He is also an Associ-ate Professor of Psychiatry and Human Behavior at the Thomas Jefferson Medical College.
2008	Case study: psychiatric sequelae following stroke in a litigated medical malpractice case	David N. Glaser, M.D. Steve Gambardella, Esq.	psychiatry CD	10626	A specific case will be discussed in detail by the expert retained by plaintiff (Dr. Glaser) as well as the attorney pursuing the litigation (Mr. Gambardella). The complexities of the factors considered will be described from the perspective of the expert as well as that of the attorney actively involved in litigating the case. Strengths and weaknesses of the case will be discussed from the standpoint of the attorney involved as well as the forensic psychiatrist engaged. Following this presentation, attendees should: appreciate how strokes, especially arising out of care below the standard-of-care, can be devastating to both the plaintiff as well as the important other; achieve an understanding of how attorneys conceptualize such malpractice matters with a focus upon damages; learn how to provide detailed, relevant opinions on such litigated matters from both a plaintiff as well as defense perspective.--David N. Glaser, M.D. is the medical director of a forensic group in Los Angeles providing comprehensive forensic services for attorneys in litigated matters, including neuropsychology and neurology. He is on the faculty of the Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship Program at UCLA. Steve Gambardella, Esq. is an attorney in the Los Angeles area specializing in litigating medical malpractice cases.
2007	Mock Trial	Roger Sharp JD Michael Bradford LLB Eric Fine MD Anna Scherzer MD Alan Levy JD	psychiatry CD	10488	Our mock trial this year will focus on direct and cross-examination psychiatrists as expert witnesses in a medical malpractice case involving the suicide of a patient voluntarily admitted to a neuropsychiatric institute. Attendees will learn about expert testimony in court and how to conform expert testimony to optimal style and content. All of the College's mock trials are fictionalized and presented solely to educate the attending forensic psychiatrists. Actors in the trial are: Roger T. Sharp, JD, Attorney at Law in Salt Lake City; Michael Bradford, Attorney at Law in Phoenix; Eric Fine, MD in private practice of consultative and forensic psychiatry in Philadelphia; Anna Scherzer, MD, board certified forensic child and adolescent psychiatrist in Scottsdale; Alan L. Levy, JD, Chief of the Criminal Division, Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney's Office in Fort Worth; Mr. Levy plays the trial judge in the mock trial.
2007	Psychiatric Malpractice Is It Lurking Behind Your Office Door?	Carla Rodgers MD	psychiatry CD	10395	The basic tenets of malpractice actions, plus specific issues that pertain directly to psychiatry will be reviewed. Risk management strategies to minimize the likelihood of being a defendant in a malpractice action will be discussed. To illustrate the issues, three clinical cases drawn from actual psychiatric practice and malpractice actions will be presented. Audience participation in the clinical case presentation is encouraged. Participants will be able to identify the legal requirements in order to bring a malpractice action, will learn what situations comprise the top five causes of malpractice actions against psychiatrists, and will be able to determine in advance what kinds of clinical situations are likely to result in malpractice actions against psychiatrists.
2006	Psychological perspectives in professional discipline and malpractice	Alex Yufik JD, PsyD	psychology CD	10321	The talk will explore the impact of substance abuse and mental illness on professional misconduct and discipline, as well as treatment with professionals. Recent literature suggests that a major proportion of professional discipline cases are directly linked to substance abuse and/or mental illness. In response, many states including California have implemented diversion programs to address this growing problem. The talk will focus specifically on the legal profession, however medical and other professional specialties will also be discussed. Attendees will 1) understand the impact of substance abuse and mental illness on professional misconduct; 2) describe various treatment modalities in substance abuse; 3) become familiar with various state diversion programs and interventions; and 4) become familiar with the biology and psychology of addiction.
2006	Mock trial -Medical malpractice case in which a patient prescribed various medications and soon exhibited Parkinsonian-like symptoms- (3 tapes)	Roger T Sharp JD	psychiatry tapes	10245	This mock trial focuses on a medical malpractice case in which a patient prescribed various medications for anxiety and depression soon exhibited Parkinsonian-like symptoms and wound up in the emergency room of a local hospital. Other drugs were administered as an antidote for the original medications, but these drugs caused further complications, including drug toxicity. Patient was seen at the hospital by a consulting neurologist and the patient s psychiatrist. Both doctors diagnosed him as having a psychiatric disorder that caused psychosis, rather than recognizing drug toxicity complications. The patient was given yet more medications to try to alleviate the psychosis which, ultimately, landed him in intensive care with another incorrect diagnosis. The patient experienced a significant right hemispheric stroke, brain damage, and other neurological injuries. What actually happened? Who is responsible, and for what? The psychiatrist said he deferred to the neurologist and followed that physician s recommendations. The neurologist said that he was just a consultant. The internist who admitted the patient said that he had transferred the patient to the psychiatrist who hospitalized him on the psychiatric unit. Attendees will learn about expert testimony in court and how to conform expert testimony to optimal style and content. All of the College s mock trials are fictionalized and presented solely to educate the attending forensic psychiatrists.
2004	Improved patient care through malpractice protection: advanced lawsuit protection strategies	Robert K Dow JD	psychiatry tapes	3123	Attendees will learn from an attorney how to protect against lawsuits by learning the latest techniques they can use to reduce the risk of malpractice; how to maintain the focus of their medical practice on improved patient care, rather than malpractice defense and how to reduce malpractice insurance costs.
2003	Doctors in trouble with ketamine-murder, rape, malpractice and insanity-4 cases and review of ketamine and the expert witness	Karl L.R. Jansen, MD, PhD	psychiatry tapes	3022	Ketamine is a dissociative anesthetic with hallucinogenic effects. The presenter will consider the separate cases of four doctors facing charges resulting from their use of ketamine. Attendees will learn: the key facts concerning the use, users and consequences of ketamine of interest to forensic psychiatrists; the likely effects of ketamine on memory and other aspects of the mental state in the more frequently encountered circumstances; forming an opinion in malpractice suits involving the use of ketamine as a therapeutic agent.
2002	Malpractice risks in forensic practice	John Podboy, PhD	psychology tape	2028	Conventional wisdom in forensic psychological practice advises that lawsuits against forensic practitioners are infrequent because the traditional clinician-patient relationship does not apply. Practitioners are, however, reminded of the adage, "Anyone has the right to initiate a lawsuit at any time for any reason." Drawing from the literature, surveys from malpractice insurance carriers, and experience, six areas of potential malpractice liability that target the forensic psychologist will be discussed. Attendees will understand the differences between clinical and forensic malpractice and will learn how to prevent malpractice exposure and actions.
2002	Expert malpractice	Ralph Slovenko JD, PhD	psychology tape	2056	no abstract
1999	Boundary violations- lethal weapon of plaintiffs' attorneys in malpractice lawsuits	Martin H Williams PhD	psychology tape	1232	Boundary violations have become a commonplace part of malpractice complaints against psychotherapists. Participants will understand how plaintiffs attorneys use "boundary violations" as an effective courtroom weapon. They will learn that many such "violations" are actually consistent with good, rather than negligent care, and will learn strategies to counter such charges in court should they serve as defense experts.
1999	Contemporary malpractice liability- a case study	Eugene L. Lowenkopf, MD	psychiatry tapes	1159	A malpractice suit is analyzed step by step by means of examining one case in detail and following it from commencement through trial. How to handle more effectively risk management activities.
1999	Managed care and medical malpractice	Eugene L. Lowenkopf, MD	psychiatry tapes	1197	Managed care has led to a diminution of the physician s power to determine treatment while remaining susceptible to malpractice liability. From the start, courts have held physicians accountable if they fail to sufficiently exhaust all means of overturning negative utilization review determinations. This presentation summarizes applicable law and reviews the more recent changes in this rapidly evolving field. Participants will understand the various legal issues relating to physician liability in managed care, how to deal with managed care treatment denials in a medically and legally appropriate manner, and how to participate in a more effective defense should a denial lead to a malpractice suit.
1999	Psychiatric malpractice case- standard of care issue-mock trial	Mock trial	psychiatry tapes	9092	The mock trial is based on a medical malpractice case involving standard of care. The plaintiff is a physician who is a specialist in infectious diseases; the defendant, a psychiatrist (psychoanalyst). The defendant treated plaintiff for anxiety and depression. Patient presented with addiction problems involving drugs and alcohol, and with ongoing high risk sexual behavior, which eventually lead to his testing positive for AIDS. At the outset of therapy, the patient specified the particulars of the kind of treatment he wanted (no prescribed drugs, no note taking at the sessions, etc.). The psychiatrist complied with these guidelines, though constantly warning patient about the risk he was running by continuing to have unprotected sex with male prostitutes. The patient, after learning that he had AIDS and in the final stages of the disease sued the psychiatrist for negligent, unorthodox treatment. Paradoxically, he sued the psychiatrist for doing the very things he had asked him to do at the outset of treatment.
1998	Child custody evaluations and malpractice suits	Penny Clemmons, Ph.D., J.D.	psychology tape	1084	Sexual relations between a client and psychologist used to be the leading cause for a malpractice suit against a psychologist; malpractice insurance companies now tell us the primary cause for a lawsuit is issues associated with custody evaluations.
1997	Countertransference and malpractice violations in the management of PTSD	Joyce Vesper PhD	psychology tape	10136	Therapists working with traumatized people are confronted with intense emotions and bizarre stories that challenge reality and reach into the darkest side of humanity. Clients pressure therapists to reenact the trauma rather than remember and purge it from their memory. Insistence that the therapist relive the traumatic event(s) challenges treatment methodology, frustrates therapists, and creates the opportunities for dual relationships and malpractice. Presenter discusses attachment problems, dominance issues and presents at least two methods by which to avoid malpractice violations.
1997	Malpractice the psychologist s nightmare- what every psychologist should know	Penny Clemmons, Ph.D., J.D.	psychology tape	1239	Questions that will be the focus of the presentation: What can I do to protect myself from a malpractice suit? When do I have immunity? What should I do if I m sued? What is the financial, emotional, and reputational impact of being sued? What are the legal steps in a malpractice suit? What will my malpractice insurance company do for me? What if I don t have malpractice insurance? Should I mediate? Should I go to arbitration? Can I be tried criminally as well as civilly? What are the long-term implications of a malpractice suit even if I am exonerated? Participants will learn the legal and psychological issues involved in a malpractice suit, and strategies for prevention, and the consequences of being sued.
1997	Clinical assessment of malingering as a defense against malpractice allegations	Lisa Webb MS	psychology tape	10120	Conduct issues surrounding abuse survivors, repressed memories, malpractice, and patient memory recantation are often blurry. As a result, malpractice suits may arise when a patient recalls sexual abuse incidents during therapy and then retracts. When recantation occurs, the clinician is often accused of implanting "false memories" to "steer" the patient toward a particular recollection. Is in fact clinical malpractice occurring when patients recant allegations, or is the patient effectively mimicking or malingering abuse symptoms? A pertinent study "Can Psychological Tests be Falsified?" involving 200 college students will be shared. Attendees will learn whether abuse symptom pathology can be effectively mimicked or malingered and receive new ideas concerning recantation of memories.
1997	Nuts and bolts issues-circumstances leading up to board complaints, ethical complaints, legal action, malpractice, criminal action and what to do what these happen	Penny Clemmons, Ph.D., J.D.	psychology tape	9093	no abstract
1996	Recovered memories, litigation, malpractice	Ray W London PhD	psychology tape	1458	no abstract
1995	Real or imagined memories- malpractice issues with dissociative disorder patients	Jose LaCalle PhD Jose LaCalle PhD	psychology tape	1461	no abstract
1995	Predicting and preventing medical malpractice lawsuits	Ira Schwartz PhD	psychology journal	881	Stress from medical malpractice lawsuits causes many doctors to be stricken with coronaries, depression, insomnia, and suicidal ideation, just 5 of 21 illnesses reported (2). About 42,000 doctors are sued annually, and each case lasts six years on the average The number of doctors who are ill at any time due to litigation is enormous. Insult is added to illness, because most suits are unfounded.
1994	Predicting and preventing medical malpractice lawsuits-a progress report	Ira Schwartz PhD	psychology journal	5275	A project to prevent malpractice lawsuits (1) was continued: a) The Medical Litigant Scale (MLS), which assesses patients' proneness to sue doctors, was expanded and validated on general litigants (GLs), people who sued various defendants; b) A subscale was added to identify law misusers (LMs), who bend, break, and excessively use or misuse the law. The expanded scale and subscale were validated, and six of twelve items tested were retained; c) A companion to the MLS, the Doctor's Rating Scale (DRS), was developed from an item analysis; it was designed to identify physicians prone to provoke lawsuits. The DRS and MLS are ready for validation and cross-validation studies, respectively, ultimately to be used by psychologists to assist physicians, insurance companies, and others in the prevention of both medical malpractice lawsuits and misuse of the law.
1994	Psychotherapy and malpractice exposure	Terrence Campbell PhD	psychology journal	8160	no abstract
1992	A conceptual framework for emotional distress claims in medical malpractice cases	John Ropiquet JD	psychiatry journal	5199	Medical malpractice cases provide fertile ground for bringing emotional distress claims. With the abandonment in most jurisdictions of the impact rule, which required some physical impact on the victim, however slight, to justify recover for emotional injuries, many classes of claimants have been permitted to recover for the emotional distress they suffer. There is a natural affinity for emotional distress claims in the area of medical malpractice, and recovery has been permitted for many claimants beside the patient. The courts have developed a confusing jumble of rules as they have struggled to develop an alternative to the impact rule. Concepts including the zone of physical danger, foreseeability, the percipient witness, the direct victim and outrage have been used to justify recovery or deny it in particular sets of circumstances. Rulings are often result-oriented and differ significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction because of the inconsistent application of these rules by different courts. The program will explain the principal rules in terms of particular case examples to show how the rules work and vary from court to court. A conceptual framework is suggested for placing the rules in context with each other and to make the varying formulations used by different courts more comprehensible and easier for the practitioner to negotiate.
1990	Suicide prevention and malpractice	Samuel Greenberg MD	psychiatry journal	10309	Suicide is the ninth leading cause of death in the United States with an incidence of approximately 12 per 100,000 per year. The ratio of men to women is 3:1, although women attempt it more frequently. The ratio of white to black is 2:1. The highest rate is in elderly white men living alone. While courts and juries recognize that psychological states cannot be calibrated with precision, they vary widely in their opinions as to when a suicide is "reasonably foreseeable." Psychiatrists can identify high risk groups, but identification of individuals who will commit suicide is not currently feasible.
1989	Psychiatric malpractice: failure to recognize and treat potentially treatable disorders	Joseph Deltito MD	psychiatry journal	5076	The so-called "minority" rule pertaining to medical practice has existed as a standard for many years. This states that if a physician pursues a course followed by a respectable minority of the medical profession he or she is within the boundaries of permissible conduct. However, in the field of psychiatry, a majority of clinicians may actually be delivering ineffective treatments when very effective treatments do in fact exist.
1986	A malpractice case: Munchausen's Syndrome	Jerome Driesen MD	psychiatry journal	5004	The essential feature of Munchausen's syndrome is the presence of physical symptoms that are fictitious to such a degree that the patient is able to obtain and sustain multiple hospitalizations. A hospital malpractice case brought by a female patient plaintiff, a Registered Nurse, is presented. Patient's prior medical history is copious.
1981	Psychiatric malpractice	Allen Wilkinson JD	psychiatry journal	10297	Psychiatry is considered a specialty, therefore, a stricter standard is required of it than medicine in general. More and more suits, alleging that a patient's mental condition has worsened due to the psychiatrist's malpractice continue to arise. General principles of malpractice and their specific application to psychiatry are introduced.
1979	Malpractice liability of psychiatric professionals-three cases	Robert Nieland	psychiatry journal	10284	This paper traces the bases upon which liability is imposed. and describes the forms of injury for which a psychotherapist may be held liable. The bases on which liability has been imposed and the forms of injury for which a psychiatrist or psychologist might be held liable are explained and principles of negligence theory reviewed. Bases of liability, strict liability, incidence of psychiatric malpractice suits, forms of injury,physical injuries to self and other, injuries in a psychotherapeutic setting are covered in this article.