HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Correspondence: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Correspondence are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Goetz, C. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Goetz, C. G. Related Collections History of Neurology Malpractice

Medical-legal issues in Charcot’s neurologic career

From the Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Christopher G. Goetz, Rush University Medical Center, 1725 West Harrison Street, Chicago, IL 60612; e-mail: cgoetz{at}rush.edu

Objective: Trace the medical-legal involvement of the 19th century clinical neurologist Jean-Martin Charcot.

Background: The two major neurologic concerns of the 1800s that involved legal questions were topics of particular academic interest to Charcot: post-traumatic neurologic syndromes and the behavioral consequences of hysteria and hypnotism. Although Charcot’s medical views influenced several nonmedical fields, including art, poetry, and drama, his impact on medical-legal issues has not been examined.

Methods: Original documents from the Bibliothèque Charcot at the Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris, legal documents, and publications from Charcot’s era were examined.

Results: Although his involvement in medical-legal affairs was a modest element of Charcot’s multifaceted career, he was involved in four different types of medical-legal activities: as a cited authority in the medical-legal literature, as an author of articles within medical-legal contexts, as a subpoenaed expert consultant, and as an expert examiner.

Conclusions: Charcot’s involvement demonstrates the long tradition of an interface between neurology and legal medicine and provides a model for highly limited but authoritative involvement by academic neurologists in medical-legal affairs.

Received November 10, 2003. Accepted in final form January 20, 2004.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. G. Goetz J.-M. Charcot and simulated neurologic disease: Attitudes and diagnostic strategies Neurology, July 3, 2007; 69(1): 103 - 109. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]