|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These seems like nurse bashing. In a court of law as a witness you answer questions that are directly put to you. If you veer off into speculation or a sililoqey, the opposing lawyer will object or the judge will object. The question then is can the prosecution lawyer, not the nurse ASK the nurse his/her opinion? If they can, then the question can be answered in either the affirmative or the negative. Therefore, it is not the nurse's responsibility to frame the proper question, but the lawyer's.
The lawyer can ask it one of two ways:
Did you find physical evidence consistent with rape?
Did you find physical evidence inconsistent with consensual sex?
If the lawyer asks the former question, you cannot pre-select a No answer as the only choice. Otherwise, why have a witness to begin with? Either way, the nurse/witness can only answer the questions as framed and asked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was a post on here a few months ago about one of these cases where the practitioner gave answers that were (apparently) misleading and the case eventually convicted the accused. It was later found that the practitioner was very careless with her records and in fact had answered questions on the stand that were in direct conflict with her notes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday January 17, @06:00PM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Lorianne:
.................................................
The lawyer can ask it one of two ways:
Did you find physical evidence consistent with rape?
Did you find physical evidence inconsistent with consensual sex?
If the lawyer asks the former question, you cannot pre-select a No answer as the only choice. Otherwise, why have a witness to begin with? Either way, the nurse/witness can only answer the questions as framed
..................................................
I don't disagree with you about the fact that a nurse can only answer the questions as framed. However , given the very limited medical knowledge of most lawyers, perhaps an MD should be the one asking the nurse questions?
Barring that, I would suggest a more fair series of questions ( that should be used in rape trials) is as follows:
Did you find physical evidence consistent with rape?
Is the physical evidence consistent with rape, and only rape in your opinion?
Alot of evidence can be "consistent" with something Lorianne, and also be neither conclusive nor incosistent with something else.
It's because people commonly don't realize this that clearing yourself of certain crimes can be nearly impossible.
Its also important to realize a few more things:
A. Child protective agencies often have certain doctors and psychologists that they prefer to use in the cases they bring. Talk about a conflict of interest: alot of these people's livelihood is dependant upon the money they receive by being involved with these agencies. Many people are not aware of this, and fail to bring in their own experts to at least give credibility to an opposing side. In way too many rape trials, testimony from SANE nurses is pretty much the only medical testimony heard. An incorrectly put question can be disastrous for an innocent man, or let off a guilty one.
B. Too many people have no training in the sciences, medicine, or critical thinking. Thus juries are often easily manipulable by what may seem to be "expert" testimony that is ill-informed or worse.
Anyway, I know a bit about how the SANE nurses are trained. They are indeed nurses, some with quite excellent medical skills, and lots of experience. The training they receive is adequate to form an initial diagnosis of many types of sexual assault, but it is by no means exhaustive or inerrant. Nor are they trained in forensics. Last, but not least, (at least at the time I checked out the program) there is an underlying philosophy underlying their traning that in so many words tells them never to disbelieve the victim. Thats not going into a situation with your mind or eyes open.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remo___ All of that is true. There is also the option of not allowing SANE trained persons as witnesses. Or the lawyers can better frame their questions. Short of outright perjury though, one cannot say the nurse/witness is being deceiptful. The best the defense can counter is that the witness is unqualified to answer the question posed, not that they gave the "wrong" answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Child protective agencies often have certain doctors and psychologists that they prefer to
:use in the cases they bring.
As does every D.A. in America, trying everything from minor drug possession to multiple homicides.
That doesn't make it right, but CPS is far from being the only agency that uses expert witnesses whom they know will say what they want them to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The real question here is if the medical findings can be clouded by opinion. In this case, I believe it can and will be.
Say, for example, a case of Lichen sclerosus et atrophicus, which many appear as child abuse, or rape damage to even a skilled gynaecology. The finding are similar, but only a few gyn's will make a proper diagnoses. For a so-called rape nurse, she could and most likely would report that the diagnoses is consistant with rape but not mention that it is also consistant with Lichen sclerosus et atrophicus.
Would she be lying if she said the diagnoses was consistent with rape? No, but she would be misleading if she did not mention it was also possibly Lichen sclerosus et atrophicus. And unless that question was asked, it wouldn't likely be forthcoming.
I believe we can't afford to have people who specialize in rape with a bias and a need to find rape. Likewise, proving sexual intercourse doesn't prove rape but only sex. Sex among 15 year-olds is as common as house-flies in the summertime.
If there is no physical evidence linking the accused party to a rape, such as semen, witnesses, then there is reasonable doubt.
As far as nurse bashing is concerned, there is much room for improvement with over 400 thousand dying each year in medical accidents, mostly at the hands of nurses. Expecting a nurse to be an expert witness in rape cases should be out of the question. This is a job for an MD who's up on all latest research and possibilities.
Dan Curry
DanCurry.Com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday January 17, @08:30PM EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Dan,
Thanks for a great post that made many points I should have made. However, I don't agree with your "blood is on the nurse's hands" hypothesis.
Most the accidental deaths in this country that are cases of medical malpractice are mis-prescriptions. Doctors (mostly male) write these prescriptions, not nurses.
However, it occurs to me that you might be from Canada. I've been to your website twice, and listened to your show a few times. My memory isn't that great concerning your nationality. In any case, I'm only talking of deaths in the USA.
Remo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is also a severe nurse shortage. This coupled with rising losses due to HMOs has forced many hospitals to load nurses (and doctors) up with a patient load even the best nurse cannot handle. Fatigue from 20+-hour "shifts" and a dirty little secret--an epidemic of prescription drug abuse amongst health professionals--also play a factor.
The problems in our healthcare system are a subject all their own, completely separate from this article.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
