誰能使用呼吸器？如何在醫療資源不足下進行分配的法律觀點【月旦時論】 試閱
Who Could Use Ventilators? How to Divide the Inadequate Medical Resource from the Legal Viewpoint
因新冠肺炎肆虐帶來醫療資源匱乏，導致分配不足的生死問題，雖在醫學界已有所討論，並嘗試提供具有參考價值的資源分配倫理指引，惟此一涉及生死救助困境的災難，終究屬於法律問題，故仍應從憲法與刑法等法律規範的角度，尋求可靠的行為指引。本文試以呼吸器案為例，說明在資源分配不足下進行分配的法律觀點。
During the wreaking havoc of COVID-19, the physician P was busy in taking care of three serious patients A, B, and C. But there was only one ventilator and P had fallen into the dilemma that there could be only one patient being rescued. A who is the only one patient with the clear mind expressed P the willing of sacrificing, leaving the ventilator to the others. P had decided therefore to let B to use it, for the reason that C was too old and B as a middle-aged man still had the responsibility to take care of his children. After few days, A and C were died from COVID-19, whereas B survived. However, if A could use the ventilator, he might have quiet high chance to live according to the investigation. Furthermore, the patients, whether A or C, could live at least few days longer if using the ventilator. The legal issue 1: Did P have any criminal responsibility? The legal issue 2: Supposed that P let B to use the ventilator but noticed that B was getting worse and it might be few days left, even he was treated continually and the survive rate was lower than C. P removed the ventilator from B to C consequently. Few days later, both A and B died from COVID-19, and C survived. Did P insofar have any criminal responsibility?
113-125
