中医医疗技术损害侵权鉴定中的证据审查分析简

近些年,随着全民养生保健意识的逐步提高,选择中医治疗的患者越来越多,接踵而来的是因中医医疗技术损害引起纠纷的案件数量的攀升。但目前国内外大多数都是按照西医治疗的标准进行鉴定,一直未形成具有针对性、系统性、统一性的中医医疗纠纷鉴定的标准与原则。本文中,作者旨在结合《侵权责任法》中医疗技术损害责任的相关规定,阐述中医辨证论治的特点,审查分析中医医疗技术纠纷鉴定中的相关证据。     

医疗行为中医务人员“意思表示”的法律效力分析

“意思表示”是医务人员在医疗行为过程中将其期望发生某种法律效果的内心意思以一定方式表现于外部的行为,是医疗行为的核心内容。针对当前临床医疗实践中医务人员意思表示的具体情况,本文分析了医务人员“意思表示”的构成要素、表示形式及法律效力,尤其是具体分析了意思表示不真实情况下医疗行为的法律效力,对医院规范管理医务人员的医疗行为具有一定的积极意义。     

浅谈医学会医疗损害鉴定专家出庭作证

《侵权责任法》统一了＂医疗事故＂和＂医疗过错＂在民事赔偿标准上二元化和医疗诉讼的诉讼案由及法律适用。然而,医疗损害鉴定的模式应如何走向,《侵权责任法》却没有提及。江苏省医学会大胆革新,开展医疗损害鉴定,在新修订的《民事诉讼法》进一步强调鉴定人出庭作证的背景下,江苏省医学会适应新形势组织医疗损害鉴定专家出庭作证,改变了以往医学会鉴定专家不署名、不出庭的历史,提高了鉴定公信力。     

强制医疗程序的实施与反思

＂强制医疗程序＂的＂社会防卫功能＂,不仅受到限制刑事责任能力精神病人和接受过治疗精神病人社会危害性的抑制,还会因＂被精神病＂现象而打折扣。破解此困境需从三方面入手：一是参照《精神卫生法》,将涉嫌犯罪的限制刑事责任能力精神病人,纳入＂非自愿性住院治疗＂范围;二是增加精神病治疗资源投入,强化＂强制医疗＂适用与解除的风险防范意识;三是堵塞《精神卫生法》中＂非自愿性住院治疗＂的漏洞,防止其成为＂被精神病＂新生代的寄生区。     

养老医疗服务中的民法问题及对策

随着依法治国政策的不断推进,健全养老医疗服务的法治体系是顺应时代要求的必然选择.在养老医疗服务过程中未充分运用法律手段,在对养老医疗服务机构的监管、对养老医疗体系的保障以及老年人权益救济等方面欠缺规范,不利于法治功能的发挥.在分析《民法典》《老年人权益保障法》等相关法律的基础之上,提出强化监管、完善保障体系、明确侵权责...     

司法改革“上海方案”中法官职业化的探索

本文希望在司法改革的背景下对法官职业化进展进行分析梳理，指出问题，找到对策。文中以司法改革“上海方案”为分析对象，该改革方案中针对法官职业化的问题提出了相关的具体措施。这些措施值得称赞，但也存在一些诸如人员分类管理制度的可行性，审判权力运行机制科学性，职业化制度保障缺失性，“上海方案”的可复制性等问题。通过对上述问题的思考，加上英美等发达国家的经验，希望对存在的问题有一个较为明确的解答。     

The role of alternative hypotheses in reducing bias in forensic medical experts’ decision making

Medical opinions are often essential evidence in criminal cases but relatively little is known about the factors that impact forensic doctors’ decision making. This research examines the role and impact of having an alternative hypothesis while forming a medical opinion. A scenario-based experiment with forensic doctors (n = 20) was conducted. In two out of three scenarios, the existence of alternative hypotheses impacted the actual opinions reached, the confidence in the judgments and the perceived consistency with the plaintiff hypothesis. Investigative and legal actors should be aware of the possibility of biases and importance of having alternative hypotheses when requesting and evaluating medical opinions.     

The development and pilot testing of a family treatment court best practices assessment: The model standards implementation scale

In 2019, the family treatment court (FTC) best practice standards (the Standards) were published to clarify attributes of FTC programs associated with superior child, parent, and family outcomes. The Standards cover the breadth of FTC operations including program structure and leadership, substance use treatment and complementary services, and behavioral responses to participants. This study aimed to develop an instrument (the Model Standards Implementation Scale; “MSIS”) that stakeholders can use to assess implementation of the Standards by individual FTCs. The MSIS balances usability with scientific validity. Interrater reliability (IRR), internal consistency, and several types of validity were assessed. Results indicated moderate to strong IRR, high internal consistency, mixed known groups validity depending on Standard, and high convergent and divergent validity. Initial findings suggest good validity and usability of the MSIS for evaluating FTC Standards' implementation. Notably, the process of using the tool functioned to educate FTC team members on the Standards. Although implementation of the MSIS is a resource-intensive process, the opportunity to receive constructive feedback proved to be an effective incentive for initial and subsequent participation in the evaluation among FTCs. Future research is needed to examine predictive validity, including association between Standards' implementation and family outcomes in FTCs.     

Justifications for Non-Consensual Medical Intervention: From Infectious Disease Control to Criminal Rehabilitation

A central tenet of medical ethics holds that it is permissible to perform a medical intervention on a competent individual only if that individual has given informed consent to the intervention. Yet it occasionally seems morally permissible to carry out non-consensual medical interventions on competent individuals for the purpose of infectious disease control (IDC). We describe two different moral frameworks that have been invoked in support of non-consensual IDC interventions and identify five desiderata that might be used to guide assessments of the moral permissibility of such interventions on either kind of fundamental justification. We then consider what these desiderata imply for the justifiability of carrying out non-consensual medical interventions that are designed to facilitate rehabilitation amongst serious criminal offenders. We argue that these desiderata suggest that a plausible case can be made in favor of such interventions.