medical examiners

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

RexKD

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2005
Messages
126
Reaction score
1
Are pathologists usually medical examiners?

I've heard of pathologists doing autopsies, but I haven't heard of anything specialty doing them.
 
A medical examiner is almost always a pathologist - there may be exceptions but I don't know of any. Bear in mind that there are also states with a coroner system - the coroner doesn't do autopsies but contracts with a pathologist to do them. It is highly confusing and variable from state to state.

Pathologists are not usually medical examiners. The majority of pathologists don't do autopsies once they finish residency. Medical examiners generally are forensic pathologists who complete a pathology residency and then do a fellowship in forensics.
 
There is a difference. I am going to school to study to hopefully become a Forensic Pathologist.

Check this link to get more info: http://www.thename.org/medical_detective.htm#what is a coroner

A coroner is a public official, appointed or elected, in a particular geographic jurisdiction, whose official duty is to make inquiry into deaths in certain categories.

A medical examiner is a physician, hence, the title medical examiner.
When acting in an official capacity, the physician medical examiner is
charged, within a particular jurisdiction, with the investigation
and examination of persons dying a sudden, unexpected or violent death.
The role of a medical examiner differs from that of the non-physician
coroner in that the medical examiner is expected to bring medical
expertise to the evaluation of the medical history and physical
examination of the deceased. The physician medical examiner usually
is not required to be a specialist in death investigation or pathology and
may practice any branch of medicine.

The forensic pathologist is a subspecialist in pathology whose area
of special competence is the examination of persons who die
sudden, unexpected or violent death. The forensic pathologist is an expert
in determining cause and manner of death. The forensic pathologist is
specially trained: to perform autopsies to determine the presence
or absence of disease, injury or poisoning; to evaluate historical and
law-enforcement investigative information relating to manner of
death; to collect medical evidence, such as trace evidence and
secretions, to document sexual assault; and to reconstruct how a
person received injuries.
 
Yeah but the thing is, the medical examiner often is the forensic pathologist. One person can do both jobs.

Coroners are political appointees, for the most part, you're right. You basically don't need any qualifications whatsoever to be a coroner other than the ability to convince people to vote for you. Probably there are many future generations of coroners who will be "trained" by watching CSI. :barf:
 
yaah said:
Yeah but the thing is, the medical examiner often is the forensic pathologist. One person can do both jobs.

Coroners are political appointees, for the most part, you're right. You basically don't need any qualifications whatsoever to be a coroner other than the ability to convince people to vote for you. Probably there are many future generations of coroners who will be "trained" by watching CSI. :barf:

Yeah that is pretty scary but prob. very true. I prefer to watch the Discovery Channel programs myself. The careerfield is very exciting to me. Pretty morbid huh? Getting giddy over cutting into a dead person. I have done alot of research on the careerfield itself and am very glad to finally be in school and on the way to making it happen. I think this forum is the best thing since sliced bread.
 
As a former forensic pathologist, I can understand your facination. Actually, I find the most interesting part is the crime scene investigations, while the autopsies themselves, like in any other profession, are mostly routine. When you've seen a hundred gunshot and stabbing wounds, you've seen most of the variance there is. However, occationally, you DO get the chance to play detective, which is fun and interesting.

The main problems in forensic pathology, which you shouldn't underestimate, are:
1. Pay: Even as an experienced medical examiner, you'd be lucky to earn the same as a newly minted surgical pathologist, even though you've done a fellowship and have years of experience.
2. Money: Apart from the pay, the vast majority of ME offices are funded by cities and counties, and are almost invariably starved for cash. They're undermanned, often in dire need of even the most basic facilities and frankly rather depressing environments to work in.
3 Politics: There's often a lot of political pressures, especially on the Chief, which makes advancement and the ability to function in your job dicey.

For those reasons, and others, forensic pathology is in somewhat of an evil circle in terms of recuitment, where few qualified people actually end up in the profession, which makes it harder on the people who're already there.

I would strongly recommend anybody to do a substantial rotation (more than the customary two weeks) with a ME before committing to a future as a forensic pathologist.
 
Top