Comment:
John T. Anderson, The Physician’s Testimony—Hearsay Evidence or Expert Opinion: A Question of Professional Competence, 53 TEXAS L. REV. 296 (1975).
 

Abstract:
In this comment, Mr. Anderson analyzes a tension between medical practice and the rules of evidence. The hearsay rule generally excludes statements made out of court. However, physicians typically rely upon the opinions of fellow doctors and upon written opinions. Exceptions to the hearsay rule are warranted when there is some special necessity for the hearsay evidence or when there are some circumstantial guarantees of the reliability of the evidence. These evidentiary rules and exceptions, as applied to medical testimony, have not been adequately addressed by the Texas Supreme Court. This comment undertakes to review the state of the law. Mr. Anderson concludes that the criterion for admission of medical testimony ostensibly subject to the hearsay rule should be the circumstantial guarantees surrounding the opinion. For example, if the physician was able to verify the statements made to her or is able to demonstrate that the opinion was to serve as a basis for treatment, then the testimony should be admitted.