
The author reports the case in which he was sued for medical malpractice. A nonunanimous jury found in favor of the plaintiff. Interviews of two of the jurors revealed that the jury discounted the expert testimony on both sides, the evidence, and the jury instructions. The author, finding that the jury decided the case based upon it's perception of the physician's "bedside manner," concludes that juries expect psychiatrists to behave more like friendly family doctors than objective psychoanalysts.
Adult, Male, Psychiatry, Physician-Patient Relations, Decision Making, Malpractice, United States, Psychoanalytic Therapy, Social Perception, Humans, Attitude to Health
Adult, Male, Psychiatry, Physician-Patient Relations, Decision Making, Malpractice, United States, Psychoanalytic Therapy, Social Perception, Humans, Attitude to Health
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
