cause of death;
excited delirium;
voluntary assisted dying;
COVID;
forensic pathology;
California;
ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD;
SEXUAL-ABUSE IMAGES;
CHILD PORNOGRAPHY OFFENDERS;
CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION;
HEPATITIS-C;
PREVENTIVE DETENTION;
ORGAN DONATION;
PRIMARY-CARE;
PERSONALIZED MEDICINE;
HUMAN-RIGHTS;
D O I:
暂无
中图分类号:
D9 [法律];
DF [法律];
学科分类号:
0301 ;
摘要:
In recent years legal rules to regulate causes of death have begun to appear. One example of this relates to the term "excited delirium" which has been subject to challenge by medical and legal professionals. Human rights activists have pushed against its usage by law enforcement and medical death investigators. The passing of the California Assembly Bill 360 restricting the use of the term is an example of this. Legislatively mandating, or banning causes of death poses an interesting challenge for death investigators. The lack of uniform guidance on how deaths should be classified across different jurisdictions and the variations in linguistic and causation -based language in cause of death statements may have influenced this development. Legislation that seeks to enforce ways of documenting the cause of a death, which is in effect an expert medical opinion, presents significant future challenges in expert testimony.