篇名

【醫療民事法】自體脂肪隆乳手術案:告知說明義務保護權利客體之定位   免費試閱

並列篇名

Case of Autologous Fat Graft Breast Augmentation Surgery: Orientation for the Object of the Right in Informing Duty

作者
中文摘要

最高法院94年度台上字第2676號判決指出,醫師如未盡說明義務,除有正當理由外,難謂已盡注意,並認醫師之說明係生命、身體權之注意義務。最高法院99年度台上字第2428號判決復從醫療契約的角度出發,重新建構說明義務之內涵與功能。本文認為,說明義務取道於契約有諸多優點,殊值參考。至於醫療法第82條於日前歷經修正後,醫師之臨床專業裁量則應以病人係經告知風險而願意承擔為其前提,否則縱使醫療處置符合醫療常規,仍非屬容許之風險。

英文摘要

It is said in the Judgement of the supreme court No. 2676 in 2005 that due diligence couldn’t be fulfilled, if the physician didn’t do informing duty except any reasonable reason; informing duty is furthermore to guarantee the autonomy of patient. The content and the function of informing duty was reconstructed with the viewpoint of the medical contract in the judgement of the supreme court No. 2428 in 2010. In the opinion of this article, it would be worth that the informing duty takes the contract as the reason. After the amendment of paragraph 82 of Medical Care Act, it is hypothesized for the clinical discretion of physicians that the patients are informed the risks and are willing to afford them. Otherwise, it could be an intolerable risk even though the medical treatment corresponded with the medical standards.

起訖頁

080-097

出版單位
DOI

10.3966/241553062018080022007  複製DOI  DOI查詢

QRCode

數位整合服務
產品服務
讀者服務專線:+886-2-23756688   傳真:+886-2-23318496   地址:臺北市館前路28號7樓

Copyright © 元照出版 All rights reserved. 版權所有,禁止轉貼節錄
TOP