肌肉鬆弛劑致死案：論醫療行為與保證人地位【學習式判解評析】 試閱
The Muscle Relaxant Case: Comment on Medical Practice and the Status of Duty to Act
本案為醫美診所之雷射光療醫師，因受護理師諮詢，告知護理師為其友人施打診所內所存放之肌肉鬆弛針劑之方式，並指導注射後之急救過程，終導致死亡事件。一、二、三審法院均認為被告醫師負過失責任，但就論斷理由上，本文認為仍有詳述之必要，因此本文將以醫療過失、醫療常規、醫療行為等議題為研討，簡要介紹本件歷審判決，並以醫療行為與保證人地位為中心進行評析。
This article analyzes the legal responsibilities of physicians in negligent homicide cases, focusing on the role of the physician as a guarantor. It reviews a specific legal case to illustrate how judicial decisions are made based on the physician’s duty to protect patient safety. The paper emphasizes the importance of professional judgment and duty of care in medical practice and advocates for clearer legal definitions of medical negligence to enhance accountability and safety in healthcare. This article comments on this case with reference to medical negligence, medical guideline, medical practice, the status of duty to act.
079-098
