Anyone moonlight as an Expert Witness?

[Tim]

It should be a pretty clear and convincing case if you decide to work for the plaintiffs' bar. In which case, why isn't the hospital or the state medical board stepping in to correct this problem?

The reality is that I have never heard of a physician self assessing a penalty stroke. The hospital and medical board usually get involved after the fact and do nothing for the plaintiff. I agree with your point that it needs to be a pretty clear and convincing case. Just saying, that is how the system works.

[Hank]

It should be a pretty clear and convincing case if you decide to work for the plaintiffs' bar. In which case, why isn't the hospital or the state medical board stepping in to correct this problem?

[WorkforFIRE]

I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying but I'm guessing whoever is hiring you is the one with who you're agreeing with. If you're being hired by a side with which your expert opinion is contrary to their stance because that would be incredibly interesting and seems like that attorney would be out of work quickly.

Yep. I agree with you on that.

[CordMcNally]

I do my fair share of providing my expert opinion. And my stance doesn’t change. I won’t be swayed to cater my opinion on whoever pays me. I’ll provide my opinion based on my expertise regardless of who that ends up benefiting.
with that said, 95%+ of the time, it ends up siding with the defendant. But I can understand what you’re saying. If my opinion ended up siding with the plaintiff more often, my volume might decrease.

I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying but I'm guessing whoever is hiring you is the one with who you're agreeing with. If you're being hired by a side with which your expert opinion is contrary to their stance because that would be incredibly interesting and seems like that attorney would be out of work quickly.

[WorkforFIRE]

How do you think the process works? The plaintiff's attorney will try to find expert witnesses that agree with them and the defendant's attorney will do the same. Why would a plaintiff's or defendant's attorney hire somebody that is going to ruin their case?

I do my fair share of providing my expert opinion. And my stance doesn’t change. I won’t be swayed to cater my opinion on whoever pays me. I’ll provide my opinion based on my expertise regardless of who that ends up benefiting.
with that said, 95%+ of the time, it ends up siding with the defendant. But I can understand what you’re saying. If my opinion ended up siding with the plaintiff more often, my volume might decrease.

[CordMcNally]

That sounds like a conflict of interest.

How do you think the process works? The plaintiff's attorney will try to find expert witnesses that agree with them and the defendant's attorney will do the same. Why would a plaintiff's or defendant's attorney hire somebody that is going to ruin their case?

[WorkforFIRE]

You'll be working for the plaintiff or defendant so you will be on one side or the other. You generally won't take a case unless you agree with the side you'll be working for.

That sounds like a conflict of interest.

[CordMcNally]

You’re not on the plaintiff side or the defendants side. You are there to provide your expert opinion with the information provided. Doesn’t matter if that benefits the plaintiff or defendant. Use your expertise to provide an expert opinion.

You'll be working for the plaintiff or defendant so you will be on one side or the other. You generally won't take a case unless you agree with the side you'll be working for.

[WorkforFIRE]

You’re not on the plaintiff side or the defendants side. You are there to provide your expert opinion with the information provided. Doesn’t matter if that benefits the plaintiff or defendant. Use your expertise to provide an expert opinion.

[CordMcNally]

Can you expand on this? You can feel free to DM it to me. I really want honest opinions about it.

This isn't something I sought out, so I'm just going to take the call as a feeler tomorrow. No real commitment, yet.

Nothing secret about it. You'll definitely be judged within your specialty and location, especially if it's a small specialty. It's just a reputation you want to think long and hard about before you get it (for better or worse).

[Brains428]

I would be fairly cautious and do a lot of thinking about being on the plaintiff's side.

Can you expand on this? You can feel free to DM it to me. I really want honest opinions about it.

This isn't something I sought out, so I'm just going to take the call as a feeler tomorrow. No real commitment, yet.

[CordMcNally]

I'm going to talk to someone about potentially doing this tomorrow. It was a word of mouth referral. The attorney I'll be speaking to typically represents the plaintiff. Did anyone feel odd representing the plaintiff's side to the case?

I read the thread and the linked articles. Any specific questions I should ask? Is money appropriate to discuss on an initial evaluation? Given that it would be my first case, does that mean I should expect less pay?

I would be fairly cautious and do a lot of thinking about being on the plaintiff's side.

[Brains428]

I'm going to talk to someone about potentially doing this tomorrow. It was a word of mouth referral. The attorney I'll be speaking to typically represents the plaintiff. Did anyone feel odd representing the plaintiff's side to the case?

I read the thread and the linked articles. Any specific questions I should ask? Is money appropriate to discuss on an initial evaluation? Given that it would be my first case, does that mean I should expect less pay?

[The White Coat Investor]

Here are a couple of experiences for reference.

https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/medical-expert-witness/

https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/7-physician-side-hustles/

[EntrepreneurMD]

https://new.guidepointglobaladvisors.com/apply/expert-witness?k=3GgMKfGceWeQShMRDR741tfS8jEXmRl