告知說明義務系列：告知義務於情況緊急時應為適當之限縮【醫事法學教室】 試閱
The Series of the Obligation to Disclose: The Obligation to Disclose Should Be Appropriately Limited when Circumstances Are Urgent
法條就醫師之危險說明義務，並未具體化其內容，能否漫無邊際或毫無限制的要求醫師負一切（含與施行手術無直接關聯）之危險說明義務？已非無疑。倘囿於告知義務之履行，反可能延誤醫療之最佳時機，故醫療法第63條第1項及第64條第1項已將告知義務於情況緊急時為適當之限縮。又醫師告知義務範圍與界線，應考量病人醫療目的而有所不同，如治療有必要且迫切性，病人需立即進行醫療處置者，則醫師對於罕見或極端之併發症並無告知義務。
The act doesn’t specify that the physician has an obligation to explain the danger. Can we require unlimitedly that the physician has an obligation to disclose for all risks (including the operation which isn’t directly relevant)? It’s doubtful. If the obligation to disclose is required to fulfill, it delays the best time of medical treatment. According to Article 63 Paragraph 1 and Article 64 Paragraph 1 of Medical Care Act have already appropriately limited the obligation to disclose when circumstances are urgent. In addition, the range of the obligation to disclose of the physician should consider the different purpose of the patients’ medical treatment. When the treatment is necessary and urgent, which means the patient needs immediate medical treatment, the physician does not required to fulfill the obligation to disclose for rare or extreme complications.
119-124
