Legal, Regulatory Update for Consultants For those in our profession who periodically serve as consultants to legal entities, there have been some changes in the past few years that are worthy of note: As a result of a U. S. Supreme Court Ruling in Daubert v. Dow, the court was given broader authority in ... Article
Article  |   June 01, 1997
Legal, Regulatory Update for Consultants
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • David Lipscomb
    Correct Service, Inc., Stanwood, WA
Article Information
Articles
Article   |   June 01, 1997
Legal, Regulatory Update for Consultants
Perspectives on Hearing Conservation and Occupational Audiology, June 1997, Vol. 4, 2. doi:10.1044/hcoa4.1.2
Perspectives on Hearing Conservation and Occupational Audiology, June 1997, Vol. 4, 2. doi:10.1044/hcoa4.1.2
For those in our profession who periodically serve as consultants to legal entities, there have been some changes in the past few years that are worthy of note:
As a result of a U. S. Supreme Court Ruling in Daubert v. Dow, the court was given broader authority in monitoring scientific evidence and testimony in courts of law. It is not my intent to summarize Daubert because information on the details of the decision are found in virtually any reference dealing with the role and scope of expert witnesses. In brief, the Supreme Court decision updated the way judges are charged with regulating the information to be allowed into testimony. The earlier Frye ruling was fairly liberal and was challenged as having given too much freedom for inserting “junk science” into testimony. Under Daubert, the judge serves as the “gatekeeper” for expert testimony. Such testimony must be demonstrated to be in concert with the scientific community upon which the testimony is predicated. It appears that, while more rigorously applied, the Daubert guidelines will still allow experts sufficient latitude to conduct their reviews and to evaluate factors. The decision does, however, reduce the likelihood that “data free conclusions” will be allowed into testimony. One of the benchmarks which the courts will apply concerns publications in peer -reviewed journals as opposed to less rigorously edited writings (such as this one).
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Become a SIG Affiliate
Pay Per View
Entire Perspectives on Hearing Conservation and Occupational Audiology content & archive
24-hour access
This Issue
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access
We've Changed Our Publication Model...
The 19 individual SIG Perspectives publications have been relaunched as the new, all-in-one Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups.