Medicolegal History: A Review of
Significant Publications and Educational
Developments
by Emil F. Frey, M.S., M.A.
T he development of the medico-
legal field in the United States has fol-
lowed an uneven course, marked by
successions of rich and fallow periods.
By the beginning of the nineteenth
century a number of universities had
qualified professors of medical juris-
prudenccon their faculties, and the
field appeared to be in full flower. Yet,
in 1876. a well-known American med-
ical professor and dean, Stanford Emer-
son Chaille, wrote with some bitter-
ness of the deplorable state of medical
jurisprudence in this country.' Today,
there is considerable interest in the
field, but the comparative dearth of
medicolegal instruction at medical
schools remains an issue.
This article briefly traces the devel-
opment in the United States oft he
medicolegal field, which for our pur-
poses encompasses the legal questions
concerning medicine and allied sci-
ences2 Selected advances in education
and publishing are highlighted; lastly,
the article reviews those problems
which appear to have prevented the
full development of this field.
Early Development of t h e Field
Although medicolegal relations can be
traced from antiquity, the modern aca-
demic field in western law and medi-
cine has its roots in sixteenth century
Italy. Germany nurtured the develop-
ment of the field, producing a wealth
of material o n the sublect in books and
journals, and retained its leadership
until France, with its long tradition in
"medicine legale," began to rival Ger-
many in the early nineteenth century.
The British entered the field only in
Mr. Frey is theDirector ofthe Moody
Medlcai Libraryar ihe University of
Texas Medical Branch at Galveston.
56 Lnu,Medicine CYHealth Care
the late eighteenth century. Partially
because of this late entry, British ex-
pertise never became as solid as that of
the French or the Germans.'
To a large extent, the Americans re-
lied upon the British medicolegal pub-
lications. For example, Thomas
Cooper's Tracts on Medical Juns-
prudence (1819), a popular publication
in the United States, simply reprinted
four of the most basic English works,
together with a preface and a "digest of
Today there is considerable in-
terest in the medicolegal field,
but the comparative dearth of
medicolegal instruction at medi-
cal schools remains an issue.
the law relating t o insanity and nui-
sance."' Furthermore, with only a few
exceptions, French and German publi-
cations reached the United States
through British t ran~la tions .Thus,
~ Stringham, a professor oichemistry at
Americans at the outset did not have
access t o the best medicolegal scholar-
ship. American reliance o n British
sources may be explained as one of the
consequences of the great similarity
between the legal systems of the two
countries and the differences between
Anglo- American common law and
continental jurisprudence. Language,
cultural, and trade patterns may also
have been factors. Yet, whatever the
causes, the consequence of such nar-
row reliance was to deprive American
scholars of the fruits of many of the
German, French, and Italian seminal
works in the field.
Milestones i n t h e Ni ne te e nth
Century: Publications
The earliest American publication in
the medicolegal field was a series of lec-
tures delivered in 1810 (and printed in
1811) by Benjamin Rush to the medi-
cal students of the University of Penn-
sylvania. The final lecture, entitled On
the Srudy of Medi~aallunsprudence,had a
wide scope, covering forensic pathol-
ogy and psychiatry, traumatic medi-
cine, toxicology, forensic obstetrics,
occupational medicine, military medi-
cine, and public health regulation. In
it, Rush deplored the fact that "in
Great Britain the science has advanced
with more tardy steps than in other
European countries," and that impor-
tant continental European works had
not reached the United States.b A s will
be seen, this criticism of the inade-
quacy of American medicolegal schol-
arship would be repeated throughout
the century.
Although Rush's lectures consti-
tuted the first American publication
on medicolegal matters, another physi-
cian had already taught the ~ubjectin
this country. In 1804, James Sackett
Columbia University, gave a series of
lectures o n medical jurisprudence.
When the medical school at Columbia
was merged with the New York Col-
lege of Physicians and Surgeons a few
years later, Stringham was appointed
to the chair of legal medicine. The syl-
labus of his lectures o n medical juris-
prudence was published in 1814 in the
Amm'can Medical and Philosophical
Register.'
A major American contribution to
the field at this time was Theodric
Romeyn Beck's Elements of Medrcd Ju-
nsprudmce. published in 1823. This
work is notable because it was the first
authoritative American publication o n
the subject and because it was consid-
ered the best general medicolegal work
published to date in the English lan-
guage. By the time Beck died in 1855,
several editions of his treatise had been
published in the United States, Great
Britain and Germany, and it was later
translated into Swedish.8
lssac Ray (1807-1881) authored the
next great American work in the medi-
colegal field, the Treateatiseo n Medicallu-
risprudenceof insanity, published in
1838. This work had great influence i n
the United States and in England,
where it gave rise t o the famous rule in
M’Naghten’s Case which became the
essential criterion for determining
criminal responsibility when insanity
was asserted as a defense. In this Brit-
ish murder trial, the successful argu-
ment that the defendant was insane
drew heavily upon b y ’ s concept of in-
sanity and its legal implications, and
largely ignored British authority.9
Between the publication of Ray’s
book in 1838, and 1850 when Amos
Dean’s Principles of Medical Juris-
prudence: Designed for the Professions of
Law and Medicine appeared, there was
a relatively fallow period in the devel-
opment of medicolegal scholarship.
Unfortunately, Dean’s book did not
live u p t o its title, since the legal as-
pects of the subject were not fully de-
veloped even though Dean was him-
self a lawyer.’O This gap was filled in
1855 by another book, A Treatiseon
Medical Jurisprudence. Coauthored by
Francis Wharton, a Philadelphia law-
yer, and Moreton Stille, a physician at
the Pennsylvania Hospital, this work
was “accepted by both the medical and
legal professions as a standard author-
itf‘and five editions were published.”
In the same year, Frank Hastings Ham-
ilton, a professor of surgery, wrote De-
formities after Fractures, a specialized
book that had a significant influence
o n the outcome of malpractice suits in
the United States.”
The year 1850 also saw the erner-
gence of the first medicolegal period-
ical, the Northern Lancet and Gazette of
Legal Medicine, inaugurated by Horace
Nelson and Francis J. d’Avign0n.l’
“Legal Medicine” was dropped from
its title and medicolegal relations from
its contents three years later, however.
Another short-lived journal, the Amer-
ican PsychologicalJournal,took over
publication of articles o n medical ju-
risprudence, but it ceased publication
six issues later.
Most of the major American contri-
butions in the medicolegal field during
the latter part ofthe nineteenth cen-
tury were thc work of dual-profession
authorities such as physician/artorney
John]. Elwe\l. While Elwell wrote reg-
ularly for both medical and legal jour-
nals, his major contribution to the
medicolegal field was A Medico-Legal
Treatise on Malpractice and Medical Eti-
dence. Compnsing the Elements ojhledi-
cal J u n s p r h c e . published in 1860.
This pioneeringwork o n medical mal-
practice in the United States was
widely used in Canada and Great Brit-
ain as well as i n the United States.“
Previous writers o n medical juris-
prudence had not even discussed mal-
practice, bur the sharp rise in the num-
ber of malpractice claims betiyeen
1845 and 1861 brought the problem to
the fore. Elwell’s book was a recogni-
tion of the fact that malpractice claims
had become an integral part of the
American medical experience.’’
Another specialized book, Theodore
George Wormley’s Micro-Chemistr? of
Poisons, was published in 1867. The
first American book devoted entirely
to toxicology, it contained original re-
search and was written with court-
room evidence in rnind.l6
John Ordronaux, another physi-
cian/attorney, probably had more in-
fluence o n the specialty than any indi-
vidual, if only because of the sheer
number of doctors and lawyers he
taught. Spanning forty-eight years. his
teaching career included stints a t most
of the outstanding medical and legal
schools of the time. His Jurisprudence
of Medicine, published in 1869, may be
considered the first genuine book o n
medical jurisprudence (as opposed to
forensic medicine) because i t ex-
pounded American and English laws as
they related t o medical practice. I n J u
dicial Aspects offmanity, published
nine years later, he adopted a more
strictly legal viewpoint than had his
predecessors.”
A major achievement a t the end of
the century was a four-volume, en-
cyclopedic work, Medical Jurisprudence,
Forensic Medicineand Toxicologlu, which
appeared between 1894 and 1896. A
second edition appeared between
1906and 1Yll.Theeditorsofthis
work were Rudolph August Witthaus,
a physician and professor of chemistry
and physics. and Tracy Chatfield
Becker, a professor of criminal law.
Many others contributed to thc \\.or!,
\vhich was “a standard comprehensivc
source of information for mnny
years.”’8
The latter part ofthe nineteenth
century witnessed a feiv attempts nt
periodicals dewred to medicolegal re-
lations. Between 1867 and 1876,the
Quarterly Journal ofPs?chological Medi-
cine and Medical Jurisprudence. edited
by Willjam A. Hamrnond, was the
only relelrant journal. Then the Med-
ico-Legal Society of New York began
to publish itsPapers in 1874,foDo\vcd
by its Bulletin. and finally by the Med-
ico-LegalJournal. ivhich surviwd for
50 years. Other state societies were
also tbundrd but they published
irregularly. I ’
Nineteenth Ce ntury Medicolegal
Education
Charles Caldwell of the University of
Pennsylvania, like Stringham at Co-
lumbia, was one of the earliest teachers
of medical jurisprudence in this coun-
try. Theodric Beck taught a t the State
Medical School for Western New York
and Walter Channing acted as lecturer
in obstetrics and medical juris-
prudence at the Harvard Medical
School.’” Duringthe early 1800s, the
Albany Medical College became a
leading center for the study of medical
jurisprudence.’ I
During the course of the century,
medical jurisprudence was gradually
added to the basic medical school cur-
riculum and e\vntually gained the
status of the specialty course most
commonly added. By 185 1, even an
outspoken critic ofthe medical schools
in the United States could admit that
graduates were “tolerably well-versed
in the ordinary details of medical and
surgical practice,”?‘ yct this was not
true of medical jurisprudence and the
basic sciences, in which there were
gross deficiencies among both students
and teachers.
A survey of medical education in
1825 shows that medical jurisprudcnce
was taught in sixof the 22 leading
schools. In 1 8 i 6 , 2 5 o f t h e 4 6 m o s t
noted medical schools, which pro-
duced 90 percent of all medical gradu-
ates, had professorships in medical ju-
risprudence. Fourteen professorships
were in separate. full-time depart-
ments, while eleven were combined
A p d 1982 57
with other specialties. At Harvard, for
example, medical jurisprudence was
initially combined with obstetrics.
Only in 1878 did Harvard establish a
separate department in what was
called “legal medicine.” The establish-
ment of the nation’s first medical ex-
aminer program in Massachusetts
prompted creation of this department
in which the local medical examiner
served as lecturer of legal medicine.*’
By the end of thecentury, medical
jurisprudence was usually included
with anatomy, physiology, embryol-
ogy, hirtology, and other subjects as a
bazic branch of medicine.z4The few
courses taught, however, were merely
introductions t o the field, and few pro-
fessionals made a career of medicolegal
relations or entered the specialty of fo-
rensic medicine. Martland blames this
In the twentieth century there
was a significant increase in the
number of publications,as well
as in the degree of their
specialization.
situation o n the old-fashioned coro-
ner’s office which was inefficient, cor-
rupt, and politically oriented. Before
the advent o f th e medical examiner’s
system, there was no outlet for well-
trained and reputable forensic
~pecialists.’~
Writing in 1912, Shastid summed
up American progress in medicolegal
rrlations in the previous 100 years in
the following words:
What, o n the whole, has been the
progress which American physi-
cians have made in lego-medical
science? Certainly not much.
American medico-juris-
prudentists have written a few
notable volumes; they have trans-
lated fewer; they have established
not one-tenth enough societies
devoted to the suhject in ques-
tion; they have founded two jour-
nals, but one of which is current;
they have delivered a good many
courses of lectures (by far too
condensed, and unaccompanied
hy clinical material) in the very
few hours allotted and begrudged
them by the authorities of the
schools. Finally, they h a w made
some two or three important and
58 Lnu,Medicined Health Care
permanent discoveries. Beyond
these few things-nothing. The
progress assuredly not great.’6
[SIC1
Unfortunately, Rush’s 181 1 com-
ments were still relevant: Americans
still had to resort to French and Ger-
man scholarship in the field.
Twentieth C e n t u r y Developments
The twentieth century witnessed an
explosion of publications of all kinds
dealing with the medicolegal field.
While detailed analysis of more than a
handful of these publications would
be beyond the scope of any journal ar-
ticle, some major trendscan be dis-
cerned. O n e such trend involved a de-
cline of general interest in forensic
medicine in favor of medical juris-
prudence. Medical journals and arti-
cles began t o emphasize medical legis-
lation and court decisions o n medical
topics, while forensic medicine, that is,
medical knowledge relevant to legal
matters, received less detailed atten-
tion. New medicolegal publications
were devoted to medical juris-
prudence; a significant example of this
trend was the “medicolegal” column
of thelournal ofthe Amencan Medical
Associationz7which first appeared in
the February 1900 issue and later be-
came a regular feature.
This new emphasis was ciiticized by
many experts in the field. For example,
Martland, writing in 1936, lamented
the diminishing interest in forensic
medicine. His article called for a return
to civic responsibility and police effi-
ciency by estahlishinginstitutes of fo-
rensic medicine and medical exam-
iners’ offices.z8
In addition to a significant increase
in the number of publications, there
was a marked increase in their degree
of specialization, similar to the trend
in other academic disciplines. As men-
tioned earlier, medical jurisprudence
and forensic medicine were originally
considered to be specialties. Today, the
field of medicolegal relations is divided
into sub-specialties. First, forensic
medicine and medical jurisprudence
have become two separate fields;
within these specialties, writers gener-
ally direct their work toward either
physicians or lawyers but rarely toward
both. Delinquency, insanity, and tox-
icology may be viewed a< topical sub-
specialties.”
As the medicolegal field has become
more specialized, medicine in general
appears to have gone o n the defensive,
with publications concentrating on
such topics as malpractice, informed
consent, and professional liability.
This trend may be a consequence of
the fact that physicians are now as
likely to find themselves in court as de-
fendants as t o appear as expert
witnesses.
Although there has been a vast in-
crease in the literature o n medical ju-
risprudence, the literature o n forensic
science has not kept pace. O n e well-es-
tablished and important journal, how-
ever, is the Journal of Forensic Sciences,
which developed in part from a 1948
Pan-American congress o n forensic
science t o aid in the exchange of ideas
and procedures between workers in the
field which had become greatly frag-
mented.’O Other journals have re-
cently been started in this area; thr
newest is the American Journal offoren-
sic Medicine B Pathology, published
since 1980. Another, the Amencan
Journal ofForensic Psychiarry, started in
1978,is indicative of the growing spe-
cialization of the entire medicolegal
field.
In the 1970s, new journals emerged
that were devoted to medical juris-
prudence. The Amen’can Journal of
Lau B Medicine which provided, in ad-
dition to analytical pieces o n a broad
range of topics, a clearing-house of bib-
liographic information for both medi-
cal and legal experts, started publish-
ing in 1975. ThelournalofLegal
Medicine, established in 1973, also
claimed an audience of both lawyers
and physicians and covered case law
and statutes. The Journal of Health Poli-
tics, Poliq and the Lau. published by
Duke University, began in 1976. There
has also been an upsurge in the num-
ber of special interest journals and
newsletters that were started in the
1970s and early 1980s,e.g., Patients’
Rights Digest. the Bulletin ofthe Amen-
can Academy of Psychiaay and the Lau,
thelournal of Psychiaay and Lau, and
Mental Disability Law Reporter.
However, medicolegal education
has continued to lag. A survey spon-
sored by the American Medical Asso-
ciation (AMA) in 1952 found that,
based on the premise that no medical
student should be permitted to receive
his or her degree without instruction
in his or her legal duties, course offer-
ings were inadequate. The AMA’s
profferred solution was to establish de-
partments of legal medicine at every
medical school. which would cooper-
ate and pool resources with a nearby
law school. The survey also recom-
mended that each medical school form
a direct relationship with a local coro-
ner or medical examiner in order t o
have access t o clinical materials.” In
1968, the American Medical Associ-
ation again suggested that medicolegal
instruction be added to the curricu-
lum by all medical schools. The A M A
stated that “the aim of these courses is
not to make every physician a do-it-
yourself lawyer. Rather it is to give him
knowledge of the law relating t o the
professional and business aspects of
medical practice sufficient to enable
him to function effectively in today’s
w~rld.”’~
Problems of Development of the
Field
The brief summary of the past 170
years of development of the American
medicolegal field provides background
for consideration of some of the prin-
cipal problems that appear to have re-
tarded its healthy development. Solu-
tions t o these problems would seem all
the more necessary because the areas of
contact between medicine and law
have become greater and more fre-
quent in recent years. Medical ad-
vances trigger new laws or new causes
of action in suits. For example, pioneer
work in blood typing was eventually
incorporated into the law o n disputed
parentage,” and the advent of arti-
ficial insemination generated new law
on legal definitions of motherhood and
fatherhood.)’ Courts and legislatures
have encountered problems in defin-
ingdeath as the medical profession
switched to neurological criteria from
cardiovascular g rite ria.'^ Growing
governmental regulation of medicine,
first in licensure, then in malpractice
and public health decisions, has also
brought the medical and legal fields
intocontact, albeit often as
adversaries.’A
The field’s slow development can be
viewed as having two major sets of
causes: the intrinsic differences be-
tween the professions of law and medi-
cine, and the enormous confusion con-
cerning the terms used t o describe the
field’s specialties. This article will
briefly summarize these problems.
The problem of definition has been
discussed by many commentators. In
an essay o n the history of legal medi-
cine, Bernard J. Ficarra concluded:
“Throughout this essay the terms med-
ical jurisprudence, legal medicine, fo-
rensic medicine may have been written
sort of erratically. These words were so
written because they were the words
used originally by the respective au-
thors of the era in which they . . .
wr~te.”~ The’ inability to agree o n a
definition of terms over a long period
of time has undoubtedly had an ad-
verse effect on development of the me-
dicolegal field. A science without con-
sistent and lexicographically
descriptive terms suffers from many
handicaps.
One such handicap is the problem
of cataloging titles. Jaroslav Nemec,
who has been responsible for publica-
tionof the International Bibliogmphyoj
Medicolegul Serials, emphasized the
problem when he stated that “count-
less efforts have been made to define
this expanded field and devise a uni-
form terminology for it; all have been
in vain.”j8 He pointed out that the
terms “forensic medicine,” “legal med-
icine,” and “medical jurisprudence”
The medicolegal field’s slow de-
velopment can be viewed as haw
ing two causes: the intrinsic dif-
ferences between the legal and
medical professions, and the
enormous confusion concerning
the terms used to describe the
field’s specialties.
have been used interchangeably a t var-
ious times in the past, and may still
mean different things to different
audiences.
In 1975, the historical roots ofthis
definitional problem were analyzed in
the Ammcun Journal oflaet, B Medi-
cine by William Curran who also of-
fered re me die^.'^ He proposed defini-
tions for each of the subdivisions of the
mcdicolcgal field: environmental law,
forensic medicine, forensic pathology,
forensic toxicology and other subspe-
cialties, health law, hospital law, legal
medicine, legal psychiatry. medical evi-
dence law and procedure, medical law,
medicolegal relations, programs of
public (medicolegal) death investiga-
tion, and public health I n u . The details
of Curran’s proposals can he debated,
bur the goal of creating order in a drfi-
nitional chaos cannot.
The intrinsic differences between
law and medicine may al>ohe a cause
ofthe medicolegal field’s incomplete
development. Increasingly in rccent
years, writers have been acknowledg-
ing that problems between la\vyers and
physicians are based o n fundamental
differences in training, methods. and
outlook. The physician I L educotcd in
the scientific method. while the Ia\rycr
studies cases and principles. According
to Ficarra:
Much of the hostility existing
between the profession.; of law
and medicine is caused by the fact
that medicine is a prospective
profession, whereas law is retro-
spective. When a physician does
anything t o any patient, he is ex-
perimenting or medically specu-
lating. But if the patient suffers
adverse results and sues, then the
court applies what is by defini-
tion a retrospective judgment
oia particular course of
treatment. . . .’”
Thedevelopment of the medico.
legal field in the United States has
been thwarted to some extent by in-
adequate attention to the education of
physicians. (Much the same observa-
tion would be valid for the education
of lawyers.) A survey conducted in
1978 reveals that the AMA’s repeated
calls for the inclusion of legal instruc-
tion in the medical school curriculum
have not been heeded. Of 101 medical
schools responding to the survey, only
40“required their students to take
some courses in legal medicine,
while.. . 2 8 indicated they had no
elective or required offerings o n the
subject.”” Even if the AMA’s mini-
mal goals were adopted by every medi-
cal school, it is questionable whether
they would be effective. For example,
many current medicolegal texthooks
are geared toward law students4’ and
f a e r the Socratic method; there are
few textbooks today that are written
.April 198.7 59
w i t h medical s t u d e n t s in m i n d , a n d 2 . J NEMEC.IKTER~ATIONAL B I B L I O G R ~ P H Y 26. Shasrid,ruprunotr 5 , s t I \ x x w i v .
t h a t u s e a m e t h o d familiar t o them. OFMEDlCOLECALSERlALS: 1736.1967 (U.S. 27 NEMEC.supranote9.at99
Drpt. of Hcalrh. Education and Welfare, Wash- 28. Martland.supranotc.25,at llY3
Norton h a s p o i n t e d out t h a t p r o v i d i n g mgton.D.C.) (1969) at 1. 29. N ~ ~ ~ ~ , s u p r ~ n o t11. rZ.at
c o u r s e s of the t y p e p r o p o s e d b y the 3. Id. at 4-8. 30. Gradwohl, R.B.,TheOriginofrheAmen-
AMA w o u l d n o t s o l v e the p r o b l e m of 4. J. NEMEC, INTERNATIONALBIBLIOGRAPHY can AcadPmyofForemtcSslences,J O C R N A L O FFo
OFTHE HISTORYOF ~GALMEDlClNE(U.S. RESSICSCIENCES l(1):7-9(1956).
a p t . ofHealth, Education and Welfare. Wach- 31. Report ofCommittee on Mcdicolegal
ington, D.C.) [ 1975)at 37-36. Problems, A Suggested Courre in Legal Medicine
A survey in 1978 revealed that 5. Shast1d.T.H.. MedicalJunsprudence in A for MedicalSchools.J W R N A L O F T H E A M E R I C ~ ~
the A M ' S repeated calls for the CYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN MEDICAL BIOGRA. MEDICAL ASSOCIATION 150(7):716 (Octoher
inclusionof legal instruction in PHY, vol. 1 (W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia) (H. 18.1952).
the medical school curriculum Kelly,ed. 1912) at Lxxxii. 32. Fisher. R.S..Temhing Medical L~u.]ouR-
6. Curran. W.J., Titles in rhe Medicolegal NALQFTHE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
have not been heeded. Field: A Proposalfor Reform. AMERICAN JOUR- 205(12):245(Seprember 16,1968) at 245.
NALOFLAW& MEDICINE l [ l ) : l (March 1975) at 33. N ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ u p r9,at a n 107.
ote
5, quoting B. RUSH,SIXTEEN INTRODLNCTORY 34. Id. at 112.
t h e "basic differences i n m e d i c a l a n d 35. ld
LECTURES (Bradford and Innskerp, Philadel-
legal e d u c a t i o n , s u c h a s t e c h n i q u e s of phia)(l811)at363. 36. Bums, C.R., ProfessionalEthics and rhe
t e a c h i n g a n d learning, i n v o l v i n g d i f f e r - 7. J.S. STRINGHAM, AMERICAN MEDICAL AND Developmenr of Amencan Lau,asApplwd to Medi-
e n t t h o u g h t processes a n d s y s t e m s of PHILOSOPHICAL REGISTER (18141ctted in A iine. in L E G A C I ELAW S ~ ~4XD
' hIEDICtNE. supro
CYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN MEDICAL BIOGRA. note 15. a t 299-310.
logic."43 He p r o p o s e s , i n s t e a d , some F W Y , V 1O(W.B.Saunders,
~. Philadelphia) (H. 37. Ficarra. B.J..A History oflegal Medicine.
form of i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y I n s t r u c t i o n . Kelly,ed. 1912) at lxxvii. LEGALMEDICINE ANNUAL (AppletonCentury-
8. T.R. BECK, ELEMENSOF MEDICALJURIS. Crofts. New York) (C.Wecht.ed. 1976) at 21.
Conclusion PRUDENCE (Webster and Skinner, Albany) 38. NEMEC,supra note 2.
(1823),citedinShastid,rupranoreS a t kxvii-iii. 39. Curran, supra note 6. a t 10-11 .
A f t e r a relatively fallow p e r i o d i n t h e 9. 1. RAY,TREATISEON MEDICALJURIS- 40. Ficarra,supranote37,at24 Fora more
n i n e t e e n t h a n d early t w e n t i e t h cen- PRUDENCE OF INSANITY (Little &Brown, Bos- detailed analysis,see W.J. CURRAN. E.D. SHA.
turies, the m e d i c o l e g a l field h a s b e g u n ton) (1838)cited in 1. NEMEC.HIGHLIGHTS IN PIRO. LAW,MEDICINE AND FORENSIC SCIENCE
MEDICOLECALRELATIONS(U.S. Depr.ofHealth (Little.Brown&Co..Boston) (2nded. 1970) at
to a t t r a c t the a t t e n t i o n i t m e r i t s . H o w - Education and Welfare, Washington, D.C.) chap. I .
ever, a g r e a t deal more research a n d (1976)at82.SeeM'Nanhten'sCase,8Ene.Reo. - . 41. Grumer,B..LegalMedu.ineinMedical
t h o u g h t needs to be d e v o t e d to the 718 (1843). SchooL. ASurueyofrheStnreoffhe Art. JOURNAL
subject. There is a c l e a r need for com- 10. A. DEAN,PRINCIPLESOFMEDICALJURIS- OF MEDICAL EDUCATION 54: 755 (1979) cited in
PRUDENCE: DESIGNED FORTHE PROFESSIONSOF Schwartz, R.L.,Teaching Physiclam and Lau~yrs
m o n l y a c c e p t e d a n d logical d e f i n i t i o n s L A w & M ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ ( 1 8 5 0 )Shasttd,supra
circdin to Understand Each Other, JCURNALOF LEGAL
in t h e medicolegal field, a n d e v e n note 5, a t Ixxu. MEDICINE 2(2). 131 (June 1981) at 138-39.
t h o u g h problems of d e f i n i t i o n h a v e 11. F.WHARTON. ~ ~ . ~ T I L L ~ . A T R E A T i ~ E O N42. See.e.g., W J. CCIRRAS. E.D. SHAPIRO.
MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE (Kay, Philadelphia) LAW. M E D ~ C ~ NDEFORENSIC SCIENCE (Little
AN
been a i r e d , t h e y a r e far from b e i n g (1855) sired in NEMEC,supanore 9, ar 87. Brown, Boston) (3rd ed. 1981);SHARPE, FIS-
solved. 12. F.H. HAMILTOH, DEFORMITIESAFTER CINA. HEAD,CASESAND MATERIALSON LAW
Today's deficient m e d i c o l e g a l e d u c a - FRACTURES (Collins, Philadelphia) (1855) cited A N D MEDICINE (1979);and WADLINGTON.
t i o n will be i m p r o v e d o n l y w h e n the in NEMEC, supra note 9, a t 87. WALTZ.DWORKIN, CASESAND MATERIALSON
13. NEMEC.supranote9.at 86. LAWA N D MEDICINE (1980). Schwartr, R.L.,
i n t r i n s i c differences b e t w e e n l a w a n d 14. 1.1. ELWELL, A MEDICO-LEGALTREATISE Teaching Physiclam and Lau,yrs to Understand
m e d i c i n e a r e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t . It is O N MALPRACTICE AND MEDICAL EVIDENCE: EachOther, supianorc41.
generally a g r e e d t h a t e v e r y m e d i c a l COMPRISINGTHE ELEMENTSOF MEDICALJURIS- 43. Norton, M.L.. Developmenr oflnrerdiscipli.
PRUDENCE (Baker,Voorhis, New York) (I8Ec7) nary Program oflmnucrion in Medicineand Lau,.
s t u d e n t should receive i n s t r u c t i o n i n cited in NEMEC,SUPTR note 9, a t 88. JOURNALOF MEDICAL EDUCATION 465): 405.
legal medicine." These courscs a r e 15. Bums.C.R., MalpracticeSuits in Amen. 408(May 1971).
necessary, y e t t h e y w i l l not e n a b l e the can Medicine Before the Cicil War, in LEGACIES IN 44. "Legal Medrine: the specialtyareas of
Lnw A N D MEDICINE (Science History Pubs., medicineconcerned with relations with sub-
p h y s i c i a n to u n d e r s t a n d the c o g n i t i v e stantive law and with legal institotions.Clini-
New York) (1977) at 120.
processes of the l a w or of t h o s e who 16. N~~~~,supranore9,at90;Shastid,supra cal medical areas-such as the treatment ofof-
p r a c t i c e it. T h i s could be a c h i e v e d b y note 5,at Lxxx. fenders and trauma medicine related to law
r e q u i r i n g t h a t all p h y s i c i a n s r e c e i v e a 17. Ordronaux. 1.. JURISPRUDENCEOF MEDI. would be included herein."Curran. supra note
C I N E (1869) and JUDICIAL ASPECTSOF INSANITY 6.atll.
llheral e d u c a t i o n in a d d i t i o n to spe- [ 1878) cited in CYCLOPEDIA supranote 5, vol. 2
cialized training. P h y s i c i a n s need to be at 227.
b r o a d l y enough e d u c a t e d t o under- 18. N ~ ~ ~ ~ , s u p r a9,atn o t96-97.
e
19. N ~ ~ ~ ~ , s u p rZ.at8-9.
anot~
s t a n d t h a t the scientific method is n o t 20. Curran, W.J., Letter,Background ofFo-
the only p a t h t o knowledge, even remicMedicie, MEDICAL WORLD NEWS12[15): Note to Readers
t h o u g h it m a y be b e s t for t h e physical 12 (April 16,1971). S t a r t i n g w i t h volume 10,the p a g i n a -
sciences. T h i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g p r o b a b l y 21. Shastid.supranote 5,at lxxxii-iii.
22. N.S. DAVIS,HISTORYOF MEDICAL EDU- t i o n of Law, Medicine El Health Care
w o u l d be best c o m m u n i c a t e d i n the CATIONAND INSTITUTIONS I N T H E UNITED h a s been a l t e r e d to run c o n s e c u t i v e l y
u n d e r g r a d u a t e years, before t h e i n t e n - STATES (S.C.Griggs.Chicago) (1851) at 178. t h r o u g h e a c h yearly volume.
sive years of scientific s t u d y begin. 23. Curran.supranote 20.
24. w. ROTHSTEIN. AMERICAN PHYSICIANS IN
THE NINETEENTH CENTURY (JohnsHopkins
References University Press, Baltimore) ( 1972) at 236.
1. jmith,S..TheDevelopmento{Formic 25. Martland, H.S., The Teaching of Formic
Medicineand Lau-Silmci Rdationr. JOURNALOF Medicine. NEWYORK STATE JOURNALOF MEDI.
Pu8~1cLAw3[2~:3C1.1.317(Fal11954). ClNE36[17): 1193 (1936).

60 Lau , Medicined Healrh Cure