A repeated plea from the legal profession is for doctors to use plain English.
Any medical term should always be accompanied by an appropriate lay word or phrase.
Such translations can be included contemporaneously in the document or listed in a glossary. The
former appears to be customary.
What is not consistent is whether the scientific or lay word is the substantive one with the other
following in parenthesis. One advantage of using the medical term substantively is the maintenance
of accuracy. The lay term may be chosen as an illustrative one. An example could be "haematoma
(swollen bruise)". The lay term in this illustration is not particularly accurate, but does describe the
finding, whereas haematoma has a specific medical meaning.
Accuracy of terminology is also pre-eminent.
There may be justifiable variations of understanding about certain words. Petechiae have been
described as a haemorrhage into the skin of less than 1 mm 26 or £2 mm,27 whereas the former
reference of these two would class 2 mm diameter haemorrhages as purpura. It is important that the
forensic clinician decides which definition is acceptable to him/her and uses it consistently. The
example given above is of little, if any, consequence in the interpretation of injuries.
The use of "laceration" for a cut to the skin caused by a sharp object is as deplorable as it is
incorrect. In due course it may contribute to a miscarriage of justice and/or expose the doctor who
casually used a term wrongly to professional embarrassment. Charges of assault commonly revolve
around the use or not of a sharp weapon. The use of the terms incision and laceration may be critical
in such cases.
An example is given:-
A fight occurs between two young adult males.
The complainant suffers a wound to the bottom lip, inferior to the vermillion border, with a smaller internal
wound inside the bottom lip in the same area.
The defendant is accused of stabbing the "victim" with a pocket knife, the two wounds being interpreted as
entry and exit wounds of the blade.
As such a complex of wounds could be caused by a knuckle lacerating the outside of the lip, and causing a
crush laceration of the inner aspect against the cusp of a tooth, the accurate description of the wound may be
critical. It is of course also vital to describe any ancillary injuries such as tooth damage, incisions or scratches
on the gum, bruises etc.
Any medical term should always be accompanied by an appropriate lay word or phrase.
Such translations can be included contemporaneously in the document or listed in a glossary. The
former appears to be customary.
What is not consistent is whether the scientific or lay word is the substantive one with the other
following in parenthesis. One advantage of using the medical term substantively is the maintenance
of accuracy. The lay term may be chosen as an illustrative one. An example could be "haematoma
(swollen bruise)". The lay term in this illustration is not particularly accurate, but does describe the
finding, whereas haematoma has a specific medical meaning.
Accuracy of terminology is also pre-eminent.
There may be justifiable variations of understanding about certain words. Petechiae have been
described as a haemorrhage into the skin of less than 1 mm 26 or £2 mm,27 whereas the former
reference of these two would class 2 mm diameter haemorrhages as purpura. It is important that the
forensic clinician decides which definition is acceptable to him/her and uses it consistently. The
example given above is of little, if any, consequence in the interpretation of injuries.
The use of "laceration" for a cut to the skin caused by a sharp object is as deplorable as it is
incorrect. In due course it may contribute to a miscarriage of justice and/or expose the doctor who
casually used a term wrongly to professional embarrassment. Charges of assault commonly revolve
around the use or not of a sharp weapon. The use of the terms incision and laceration may be critical
in such cases.
An example is given:-
A fight occurs between two young adult males.
The complainant suffers a wound to the bottom lip, inferior to the vermillion border, with a smaller internal
wound inside the bottom lip in the same area.
The defendant is accused of stabbing the "victim" with a pocket knife, the two wounds being interpreted as
entry and exit wounds of the blade.
As such a complex of wounds could be caused by a knuckle lacerating the outside of the lip, and causing a
crush laceration of the inner aspect against the cusp of a tooth, the accurate description of the wound may be
critical. It is of course also vital to describe any ancillary injuries such as tooth damage, incisions or scratches
on the gum, bruises etc.
0 comments:
¿Te animas a decir algo?