submitted July 5th 2020, accepted Aug. 12th 2020
Fabio Tadeu Panza (1)
http://lattes.cnpq.br/5528930004210470 – ORCID: 0000-0001-7841-7461
Viviam Paula Lucianelli Spina (1)
http://lattes.cnpq.br/8042791240784011 – ORCID: 0000-0001-9196-3061
Lucas Pedroso Fernandes Ferreira Leal (1)
http://lattes.cnpq.br/4910203611295452 – ORCID: 0000-0001-6489-2931
(1) Instituto de Medicina Social e de Criminologia do Estado de São Paulo (IMESC), São Paulo-SP, Brasil.
e-mail: fabio.panza@hc.fm.usp.br
ABSTRACT
The expert must stay alert to the possibility of malingering, a well recognized difficulty, as there’s often secondary gains, whether they are social security, tax exemptions or even monetary benefits. Legal examination differs from the general practice, in which the patient shares a trusting relationship with his physician, reliably informing his symptoms and collaborating with the clinical examination. In medical expertise, there is no such relationship of trust or broad collaboration. Malingering has distinct characteristics, such as expressing or hiding a certain disease. The expert must then make use of all the technical knowledge of the pathophysiology and apply specific tools of the expert testimony in order to identify the real health condition of the individual, and thus better inform the requesting authority.
Key-words: simulation, concealment, medical expertise
