From the clinics to the courts: the role evidence should play in litigating medical care

Right to experimental treatment: FDA new drug approval, constitutional rights, and the public's health

On May 2, 2006, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in a startling opinion, Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs v. Eschenbach, held that terminally ill patients who have exhausted all other available options have a constitutional right to experimental treatment that FDA has not yet approved. Although ultimately overturned by the full court, Abigail Alliance generated considerable interest from various constituencies. Meanwhile, FDA proposed similar regulatory amendments, as have lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in Congress. But proponents of expanded access fail to consider public health and consumer safety concerns. In particular, allowing patients to try unproven treatments, outside of controlled clinical trials risks both the study's outcome and the health of patients who might benefit from the deliberate, careful process of new drug approval as it currently operates under FDA's auspices.

Medical aspects of malpractice crisis in Greece: medical responsibility: a doctor's view

Malpractice and medical liability have been introduced into Greek reality over the last decade. Forensic sciences hold a key role in the investigation of medical liability cases. Along these lines, the medical examiner stands between colleagues and lawyers, who have divergent intentions in the investigation of such cases. This article offers an overview of the rapidly changing reality in Greece and approaches medical liability from the doctor's viewpoint. The role of forensic science and the medical examiner is portrayed, along with the emerging difficulties in the investigation of medical liability cases. Also attempted is an interpretation of the crisis phenomena that are very often seen between doctors and lawyers. However, the intent of this article is to search for ways to turn competition and tension between medical and law professionals into cooperation and understanding for the best interest for both professions and, more importantly, for the community.