ABSTRACT
Doctors and lawyers in the disciplinary board work together intensively, each from their own professional perspective, whereby the mutual dynamics greatly benefit the quality of the judgments: 1+1=3. How this cooperation takes place is not always visible to outsiders. After all, the session of the disciplinary board is public, but what is discussed before and after the session in the council chamber is decided and only comes out in the form of the ruling. How does that process work in the council chamber? Does the input of lawyers and doctors differ? What if they disagree? How do they reach an agreement? In this contribution two lawyers, a doctor and former doctor (member-lawyer), four authors from the Central Disciplinary Board for Health Care (CTG), give an insight into the chemistry between lawyers and doctors of the CTG.
