Retrospective Assessment of Forensic Facts Under 18 Years of Age in İzmir

Öz

Aim: The aim of this study was to examine the cases under the age of 18 who applied to the forensic medicine outpatient clinic of our hospital in İzmir. Material and Methods: Among the 6,492 reports prepared for the patients who applied to İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Atatürk Training and Research Hospital Forensic Medicine Polyclinic between January 2019 and January 2022, 471 final reports prepared for forensic cases under the age of 18; age, gender, type of incident, area of injury, according to TCK 86 law clause; It was examined retrospectively with parameters such as whether it is life-threatening or not, and whether it can be eliminated with a simple medical intervention or not. Results: In our study, 471 reports were examined; The most common age was 18, the mean age was 14, the number of girl cases was 203 (43.1%), the number of male cases was 268 (56.9%), the most common type of event was the assault, while traffic accidents were the second most frequent, the most frequently injured body area in cases under 18 years old was the extremities in 154 (32.7%), followed by head injuries in 101 (21.4%) cases, and life-threatening injuries in 19 (4%) cases. It was found that it was seen most frequently in July and least in April. Conclusion: The data determined in our study were in parallel with similar studies in the literature, while the most common cause of death in autopsy series was determined as traffic accident, it was seen that the most common cause of injury in outpatients who applied to our polyclinic was assault.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Forensic Reports
• Child
• İzmir
• Forensic Medicine

Kaynakça

1. TUIK Kurumsal. İstatistiklerle çocuk, 2022. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Istatistiklerle-Cocuk-2022-49674 access date 16.08.2023
2. TUIK Kurumsal. Güvenlik birimine gelen veya getirilen çocuk istatistikleri, 2020. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Guvenlik-Birimine-Gelen-veya-Getirilen-Cocuk-Istatistikleri-2020-37200 access date 16.08.2023
3. Runyan D, Wattam C, Ikeda R, et al. Child abuse and neglect by parents and other caregivers (from world report on violence and health, P 57-86, 2002, Etienne G. Krug, Linda L. Dahlberg, et al., eds.--See NCJ-197425). Geneva: World Health Organization. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/child-abuse-and-neglect-parents-and-other-caregivers-world-report access date 15.08.2023
4. İşeri E, Acar AŞS, Bodur Ş. Basic Book of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Hekimler Yayın Birliği; 2008;68-77.
5. Ayaz M, Ayaz AB, Soylu N. Psychiatric evaluation of child and adolescent forensic cases. J Clin Psy. 2012;15:33-40.
6. TUIK Kurumsal. Güvenlik birimine gelen veya getirilen çocuk istatistikleri, 2020. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Guvenlik-Birimine-Gelen-veya-Getirilen-Cocuk-Istatistikleri-2020-37200 access date 16.08.2023
7. Ministry of Justice Statistics 2020. https://adlisicil.adalet.gov.tr/Home/SayfaDetay/adl-istatistikler-yayin-arsivi access date 01.10.2023
8. Koç S, Çetin G, Kolusayın Ö. Acil olgularda hekimin sorumluluğu ve adli tıp sorunları. Sendrom Dergisi. 1994;6:73-81.

9. Sever M, Saz EU, Koşargelir M. Bir üçüncü basamak hastane acil servisine başvuran adli nitelikli çocuk hastaların değerlendirilmesi. 2010;16:260-7.
10. Özdeş T, Berber G, Kumral B, et al. Evaluation of forensic cases under the age of 18 in Kastamonu. Int J Basic Clin Med 2013;1:146-9.
11. Hüsrevoğlu Esen F, Doğan M. Forensic cases in pediatric emergency department: a single center experience. Turkish Journal of Pediatric Emergency and Intensive Care Medicine. 2022;9:7–10.
12. Demir ÖF, Aydın K, Turan F, et al. Analysis of pediatric forensic cases presented to emergency department. Turk Pediatri Ars. 2013;48:235–40.
13. Korkmaz T, Erkol Z, Kahramansoy N. Evaluation of pediatric forensic cases in emergency department: a retrospective study. Haseki Tıp Bülteni. 2014;52:271-7.