Omnipresent Wikipedia
September 08, 2009
Posted by:Alex Dabek
As a Wikipedia sceptic, I was quite bemused and shocked at the same time to learn of the recent Wikipedia blunder involving a Scottish judge (the name unfortunately escapes me but I am sure that one could look it up on Wikipedia’s website!) who instead of relying on a reputable source of medical knowledge had consulted Wikipedia and used its definition of a medical condition in his judgment concerning a man who suffered serious head injury. The judgment was then published on the official website of the Scottish court service and the link was (inadvertently, I hope) created which meant that the readers could be re-directed to Wikipedia’s own page for further details of the medical condition. The court’s information officer explained that although this was not intended the only reason why the judge consulted Wikipedia was to make sure that he used the terminology that was familiar to his readers. Now, I am sure everyone agrees that this really is an interesting trend.
I only hope that we will not be seeing similar trends in either clinical negligence or professional negligence claims.