医责险承保方能否成为仲裁第三人

采用仲裁模式处理矛盾突出又没有太多经济效益的医患纠纷初期，必须要有当地政府的参与并在财力上对仲裁机构予以支持，但长久如此既不利于仲裁模式处理医患纠纷的推广，也不利于仲裁的公正性及仲裁员回避制度的有效落实。如何不依靠政府的财政支持，通过裁决纠纷本身获得合理的报酬维持运行是亟待破解的难题。从制度设计层面看，医患纠纷仲裁模式若能与正在推行的医疗损害责任保险制度进行有效的整合，可能是解决仲裁长期运转费用的一个重要途径。但这种审理与理赔模式的整合，实际上涉及到医患纠纷仲裁是否存在第三人、承保方能否成为仲裁第三人的问题。本文以深圳市医患纠纷仲裁为切入点，对上述问题进行探讨。

Whether the insurer of medical damage liability insurance can be the third party in arbitration proceedings

Using arbitration mode to deal with doctor-patient disputes with obvious contradiction and withoutany economic benefit, it must has the participation of the local government and on the financial support from thegovernment to the arbitration institutions in preliminary stage. But for a long time, it would has the disadvantage topromote the arbitration mode, and is unfavorable to the impartiality of the arbitration and the arbitrator＇ withdrawalsystem. It＇s need to be solved that the arbitration mode get the return from solveing the disputes itsself, not just re-ly on the government＇s financial support. From system design level, it may be may be an important way to solve thelong-term operation fee, if medical disputes arbitration mode can be mergered with medical damage liability insurancesystem. But this type integration of trial and claims actually involves some problems, such as whether there is athird party of arbitration in doctor-patient dispute, and whether the insurer can be the third party in arbitration proceedings.