”Yo, I får en erklæring senere”

Retsmedicineres sproglige balanceakt i obduktionserklæringer

Abstract

Forensic statements produced by forensic pathologists in murder and attempted murder cases must communicate complex medical assessments to diverse audiences, such as forensic pathologists, but also to groups who are not medical experts such as police, lawyers, judges, jury members and lay judges. This article examines how forensic pathologists navigate the communicative tensions that arise when their written statements must address audiences with widely differing levels of medical knowledge and genre familiarity. Through a qualitative study design, the study explores the perspectives and priorities that shape the linguistic choices in these statements. Two focus groups with a total of ten forensic pathologists were conducted, and data were analysed using thematic analysis. Six key themes were identified: 1) The internal target group, where statements are primarily written to the forensic pathologist themselves or other forensic pathologists; 2) The balancing act between precision and comprehensibility; 3) Objectivity as a decisive factor in linguistic choices; 4) The role of tradition and the local linguistic culture; 5) Authority and how this is constructed through language; and 6) The difficulties of assessing the lay audience’s understanding. The study shows how forensic pathologists navigate the tension between expert precision and lay comprehensibility. While the internal target group is prioritized, efforts are made to accommodate lay understanding—though often constrained by institutional language traditions, perceptions of authority, and a rhetorical preference for objectivity. The findings suggest a strong linguistic culture and highlight challenges related to the “curse of expertise”.