Home > Journals > Minerva Medicolegale > Past Issues > Minerva Medicolegale 2007 December;127(4) > Minerva Medicolegale 2007 December;127(4):261-72

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

MINERVA MEDICOLEGALE

A Journal on Forensic Medicine


eTOC

 

REVIEWS  


Minerva Medicolegale 2007 December;127(4):261-72

Copyright © 2007 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: Italian

Semi-permanent make-up, scar damage and “good” expertise. Beautician, aesthetic surgeon, forensic physician: competencies and responsibilities compared

Iorio M. 1, Navissano M. 2

1 Dipartimento di Anatomia Farmacologia, Medicina Legale Università degli Studi di Torino, Torino 2 Struttura Complessa di Chirurgia Plastica Generale Ospedale CTO, Torino


PDF  


After outlining the nature of aesthetic treatment defined as semi-permanent make-up, and the regulations for the legal exercise of the profession of beautician, the results of a study of the appraisals of a sample of officially appointed technical experts and consultants on the question of damage due to professional error are reported. Starting from the law on the abusive exercise of a profession for which a diploma is legally required, many inaccuracies were found in the juridical concepts of lesion, illness and damage, as well as forensic medical inaccuracies regarding the causal relation shown by the expert in plastic and aesthetic surgery. It was considered opportune to define the principles for the correct drafting of the expert report and list the judgments and evaluations to be avoided.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail