The age profile of court-appointed physicians in Poland. Status at the end of 2021.

Anna Smędra, Jarosław Berent
{"title":"The age profile of court-appointed physicians in Poland. Status at the end of 2021.","authors":"Anna Smędra,&nbsp;Jarosław Berent","doi":"10.4467/16891716AMSIK.22.021.17621","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The problems with obtaining expert opinions from court-appointed physicians in Poland have been known for a long time and are well-diagnosed. The reasons for this state of affairs are: an overall insufficient number of physicians compared to the general needs, uncompetitive remuneration levels, and the difficulty of reconciling professional and court-appointed expert duties, while taking into consideration the availability expected of experts. The ongoing generational transition may further exacerbate these problems. The purpose of this study was to investigate the latter phenomenon by comparing the age profile of court-appointed physicians with that of physicians in general. Information on the age of court-appointed physicians was obtained from the presidents of regional courts and the Central Register of Physicians, while general statistics on physicians were also acquired from the latter. Research allowed us to formulate the following conclusions: only 0.8% of all physicians in Poland serve a court-appointed expert function. Almost two-thirds of court-appointed physicians belong to the Baby Boomer generation (born in 1946-1964), nearly one-third to Generation X (1965-1980), and only one-sixteenth (6.10%) to Generation Y (1981-1996), or Millennials. The results obtained, as well as data from the literature, suggest that the current bad state of affairs regarding access to the opinions of court-appointed physicians will further deteriorate in the coming years due to generational changes, i.e., the replacement of Baby Boomers and Generation X, currently dominant among court-appointed experts, by Generation Y, i.e., Millennials, with a different attitude to life.</p>","PeriodicalId":35709,"journal":{"name":"Archiwum Medycyny Sadowej i Kryminologii","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archiwum Medycyny Sadowej i Kryminologii","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4467/16891716AMSIK.22.021.17621","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The problems with obtaining expert opinions from court-appointed physicians in Poland have been known for a long time and are well-diagnosed. The reasons for this state of affairs are: an overall insufficient number of physicians compared to the general needs, uncompetitive remuneration levels, and the difficulty of reconciling professional and court-appointed expert duties, while taking into consideration the availability expected of experts. The ongoing generational transition may further exacerbate these problems. The purpose of this study was to investigate the latter phenomenon by comparing the age profile of court-appointed physicians with that of physicians in general. Information on the age of court-appointed physicians was obtained from the presidents of regional courts and the Central Register of Physicians, while general statistics on physicians were also acquired from the latter. Research allowed us to formulate the following conclusions: only 0.8% of all physicians in Poland serve a court-appointed expert function. Almost two-thirds of court-appointed physicians belong to the Baby Boomer generation (born in 1946-1964), nearly one-third to Generation X (1965-1980), and only one-sixteenth (6.10%) to Generation Y (1981-1996), or Millennials. The results obtained, as well as data from the literature, suggest that the current bad state of affairs regarding access to the opinions of court-appointed physicians will further deteriorate in the coming years due to generational changes, i.e., the replacement of Baby Boomers and Generation X, currently dominant among court-appointed experts, by Generation Y, i.e., Millennials, with a different attitude to life.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
波兰法院指定医生的年龄概况。2021年底的状态。
在波兰,从法院指定的医生那里获得专家意见的问题早已为人所知,并且得到了很好的诊断。造成这种状况的原因是:与一般需要相比,医生总数不足,薪酬水平缺乏竞争力,在考虑到专家的可用性的情况下,难以协调专业和法院指定的专家职责。正在进行的代际过渡可能会进一步加剧这些问题。本研究的目的是通过比较法院指定的医生与一般医生的年龄特征来调查后一种现象。关于法院指定的医生年龄的资料是从区域法院院长和中央医生登记处获得的,而关于医生的一般统计资料也从后者获得。研究让我们得出以下结论:在波兰,只有0.8%的医生担任法院指定的专家职能。近三分之二的法院指定医生属于婴儿潮一代(1946-1964年出生),近三分之一是X一代(1965-1980年),只有十六分之一(6.10%)是Y一代(1981-1996年),或千禧一代。所获得的结果以及文献中的数据表明,由于代际变化,即目前在法院指定专家中占主导地位的婴儿潮一代和X一代被生活态度不同的Y一代即千禧一代所取代,目前获得法院指定医生意见的不良状况将在未来几年进一步恶化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Archiwum Medycyny Sądowej i Kryminologii przyjmuje w języku polskim: prace doświadczalne, poglądowe, kazuistyczne, artykuły o charakterze szkoleniowym z medycyny sądowej, kryminologii i dziedzin pokrewnych, opracowania z zakresu etyki i deontologii lekarskiej, streszczenia prac obcych, oceny książek, sprawozdania z działalności PTMSiK, sprawozdania ze zjazdów krajowych i zagranicznych, komunikaty Zarządu Głównego PTMSiK, listy do Redakcji. Autor powinien podać, do jakiej kategorii zalicza tekst nadesłanej pracy. Przyjmowane do druku będą również prace autorów zagranicznych w języku angielskim.
期刊最新文献
Supplement to the work „Smoothbore hunting ammunition – a historical overview” Pro Memoria: Prof. Roman Mądro (1943-2023) Pro Memoria: prof. Jerzy Jan Janica (1939-2022) Review of the experiences of users of methaqualone and methaqualone derivatives. An analysis of online forums. COVID-19-related excess mortality - an overview of the current evidence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1