篇名

病人自主權利法擴充特殊拒絕醫療權之必要性   免費試閱

並列篇名

The Necessity of the Enactment of Patient Autonomy Act Concerning the Extension of the Right of Refusing Life-Sustaining Treatment

作者
中文摘要

病人自主權利法擴大特殊拒絕權之適用範圍,背後預設現行法接受的特殊拒絕權非常有限,此一預設稱之為現行法保護生命論。與之相對的則有現行法保護自主論,該理論主張現行法已充分保護特殊拒絕權,無進一步立法之必要。本文先探討特殊拒絕權在倫理及憲法上的性質,再據以分析現行法,指出醫療法與醫師法並無特殊拒絕權;法定急救義務亦不宜理解為強制締約義務;最後,無論安寧緩和醫療條例或病人自主權利法,均非特殊拒絕權之補充性規定。以病人自主權利法來擴充特殊拒絕權,顯屬必要。

英文摘要

The enactment of Patient Autonomy Act (hereinafter“PAC”) enlarges the scope of current patient’s Right of Refusing Life-Sustaining Treatment (hereinafter“RRLST”). PAC presupposes the primacy of life protection thesis in the now-in-force legal system. As a result, existing laws does not accept RRLST at all or, at most, accept it in a very limited sense. On the contrary, the primacy of patient autonomy thesis claims that RRLST is firmly guaranteed in the current state of law and PAC is therefore superfluous. This article first analyses the status of RRLST in ethical and constitutional terms, then discusses the should-be interpretation of this right in existing laws in order to demonstrate that neither Medical Care Act nor Physicians Act recognizes RRLST. The so-called Physicians’ legal duty to provide urgent care would not be properly interpreted if it was construed only as compulsory for Physicians to have a civil-law like contractual-relationship with the patient. Furthermore, neither Hospice Palliative Care Act nor Patient Autonomy Act are just supplementary regulations concerning RRLST. As conclusion, the enactment of PAC is justifiable because there is no RRLST or, at most, only some in a very limited sense in existing laws and it is necessary to extend the scope of RRLST through PAC.

起訖頁

007-024

出版單位
DOI

10.3966/241553062019010027001  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