English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 111314/142224 (78%)
造访人次 : 48365963      在线人数 : 791
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧：
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据
    •  进阶搜寻


    请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139585


    题名: 變動中之民事醫療過失判定基準
    The Criteria of Judging Medical Negligence
    作者: 吳志正
    贡献者: 法學評論
    关键词: 醫療過失;醫療常規;執業慣例;醫療水準;善良管理人;善良管理醫師;注意義務;醫事鑑定
    Medical Negligence;Medical Regulation;Professional Custom;Contemporary Medical Competency;The Due Care of a Good Administrator;The Due Care of a Good Physician;Duty of Care;Expert Testimony
    日期: 2019-09
    上传时间: 2022-04-08 10:09:32 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 醫糾審判常以醫療常規作為醫療過失之判斷基準，導致逐漸偏離過失理論，實務與學說對此已有認知並圖提出不同之判斷基準，而為甫修訂之醫療法所採。然而不同基準或理論概念各應做何理解？彼此間應如何整合？遂成問題。本文擬釐清對醫療常規一詞理解上之誤會，其次觀察到不論是美國習慣法從執業慣例演變至理性醫師說之嬗遞，或是日本法上捨醫療慣行至漸趨穩健之相對醫療水準說，均實質地影響著我國理論與實踐走向，而此等發展趨勢，實則與我國民法上「善良管理人注意程度」之基本理論若合符節。據此，本文認為應回歸過失基本理論，以善良管理醫師之注意程度作為醫療過失判斷基準，將紛亂之判準與過失基本理論整合，並分別就醫療政策面過失與執行面過失之判斷提出意見。
    Due to the disciplinary gap between medicine and law, the judgement of negligence in the medical malpractice litigation often lies beyond the capacity of the judges, who after all have to resort to medical testimony. However, currently the opinions made by medical testimony are heavily dependent on whether the accused physician violates the “medical regulations” or not, and consequently the judgement of medical negligence bears the risk of straying from contemporary fault theory, therefore induces widespread criticism. By way of multidisciplinary approach, this article makes efforts to help reaching a consensus on the term “medical regulations” and to investigate its feasibility in judging medical negligence. Hereafter this article attempts to explore and integrate the existing authoritative opinions regarding the criteria of judging medical negligence, many of which have already been stipulated into the newly amended Medical Care Act. Comparative law aspects on judgement criteria of medical negligence and their influences on us are thoroughly reviewed. It might be concluded that either the involution from “professional custom standard” to “reasonable physician standard” in case law or the transition from “medical customs” to “relative contemporary medical competency” in Japanese law reveals the return to fault theory that concurs with the concepts of “exercising the due care of a good administrator” in our civil code. This article holds that the application of medical regulations in the judgement of medical negligence still might be of significant value in certain circumstances, and that the medical negligence could be divided into the fault in decision making process and the fault in practice and skill, and these two should be attentively discriminated. It is hoped that this article might help in better understanding and establishment of the judgment criteria of medical negligence.
    關聯: 法學評論, 158, 87-159
    数据类型: article
    DOI 連結: https://doi.org/10.3966/102398202019090158002
    DOI: 10.3966/102398202019090158002
    显示于类别:[政大法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    文件中的档案:

    档案 大小格式浏览次数
    6.pdf1927KbAdobe PDF2179检视/开启


    在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回馈