Legal Reasoning: Why the Law and Its Application Are Confusing to Medical Providers

Abstract

Physicians and providers trained in scientific reasoning are confused by the process by which legal facts and legal proof are presented and offered during litigation and in a court of law. Legal facts are not scientific facts; legal proof is not scientific proof; and legal conclusions are not derived in the same way as are scientific conclusions. Such distinctions are not simply academic; they are highly practical, and a better understanding of the legal process can help providers who face with litigation both better prepare for and better participate in the legal process. All professions have, to some extent, a vocabulary specific to the profession; for example, the anatomy, biochemistry, pharmacology, and physiology upon which medical care professions are based provide a basis for much of the specific vocabulary of the healthcare professions. In a similar fashion, the legal lexicon is replete with terms rooted in Latin and English common law traditions. Professional terminology is also the basis for terms of art, plain words that have specific meaning to those in that profession; professional terminology is how professional peers communicate effectively and efficiently. Medical professionals often sense that legal terms, legal reasoning, and legal process are meant to confuse; however, it’s important to realize that professional terms, reasoning and process, are integral parts of each profession. A better understanding of legal terminology and process can only serve to build a better understanding of the larger system in which healthcare is an integral part.