Article contents
Expert Testimony by Persons Trained in Ethical Reasoning: The Case of Andrew Sawatzky
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2021
Extract
In February 1999, I received a call from a lawyer at Hill Abra Dewar stating that she had instructions to retain my services as an expert witness in the case of Sawatzky v. Riverview Health Centre. She was representing the Manitoba League of Persons with Disabilities which had intervenor status.
In Canada the admission of expert testimony depends upon the application of four criteria outlined in R. v. Mohan by Justice Sopinka. These criteria are: (a) relevance; (b) necessity in assisting the trier of fact, (c) the absence of any exclusionary rule; and (d) a properly qualified expert. The lawyer believed that I could provide the court with relevant, reliable ethics testimony about surrogate decision-making and about medical futility-information that likely would be outside the experience and knowledge of the trier of fact.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2000
References
- 7
- Cited by