• 간호행정학회지
• /
• 제5권1호
• /
• pp.113-136
• /
• 1999

There are some new trends in judgments concerning medical malpractice. which include emphasis on medical professionals' explanation duty in order to materialize patient's rights of self-determination. Now, patient is not a mere subject of medical and nursing care any more, but a subject, participating in medical practice on equal terms with medical professionals. Legal accountability is no limited to nurses in advanced practice: it is a recognized fact of life for every practicing nurse. whether she is an RN employed as a staff nurse in a hospital, a Certified Nurse-Midwife in independent practice or a patient's home. Therefore, it is essential for nurses to be as familiar as possible with the legal guidelines that govern their patient care responsibilities. However there are only a few studies focused on nursing negligence. To define nurse's civil liability in medical malpractice, it is necessary to indentify both legal nursing behaviors and nurse's due care in those nursing behaviors. So this paper focused on nurse's due care, especially in nursing malpractice. To clarify nurses' due care. chapter II has focused on nursing behavior and the scope of nursing practice based on the medical law and health care related study results. Chapter III deals with the content and scope of nurse's due care. Generally. negligence is defined as not doing something which a resonable person. guided by those ordinary considerations which or dinarily regulate human affairs. would do. or doing something which a resonable and prudent man would not do. Next. it describes how we can set the standard of due care in nursing practice. There is objective factors and subjective factors. And we also discuss about the limitation of due care in nursing practice. Finally. chapter IV deals with the case studies related to nursing negligence in the situation of determination. Now', patient is not a mere subject of medical and nursing care any more, but a subject participating in medical practice on equal terms with medical professionals. Legal accountability is not limited to nurses in advanced practice; it is a recognized fact of life for every practicing nurse. whether she is an RN employed as a staff nurse in a hospital. a Certified Nurse-Midwife in independent practice or a patient's home. Therefore, it is essential for nurses to be as familiar as possible with the legal guidelines that govern their patient care responsibilities. However. there are only a few studies focused on nursing negligence. To define nurse's civil liability in medical malpractice, it is necessary to identify both legal nursing behaviors and nurse's due care in those nursing behaviors. So this paper focused on nurse's intravenous injection. post operation nursing care. blood transfusion. and patient nursing care. The result of this paper is as follows. First. there are several cases dealing with nurse's negligence in nursing practice. however, those cases didn't judge nurse's due care based on individual -specific standard but general-objective standard. Second, there is a tendency to put an emphasis on the principal of belief to distinguish who has the liability in the case of medical malpractice among medical care team. So nurses shoud practice nursing care more actively to protect themselves and patients because there is an effort to form professional nurse system and the scope of nursing practice will be deeper and broader. Third, standard of care is a necessary element in establishing negligence. If a nurse is able to meet the standard of care, no breach will be found.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.295-329
• /
• 2012

A medical malpractice case requires special legal protection, considering its characteristics, such as seriousness and long term effects of its damages, medical information asymmetry between practitioners and patients, and difficulties in realization of liability. Taking the points above into consideration, Medical Malpractice Arbitration Act of 2012(MAA) has legislative intent to protect the rights of the injured from medical malpractice, while protecting the stability of medical practice by providing arbitration as an alternative dispute resolution. However, constitutional review is required for one new scheme of compensation for medical injuries during delivery, which is implemented in MAA of 2012, especially with regard to freedom to exercise occupation, property, equality under the Constitution. Two important aspects are 1. according to the law, absolute liability applies to compensation for damages during delivery without negligence of practitioners; and 2. the practitioner bears some portion of the cost, 30% in the law above. This article aims to analyze this new institution in various aspects of the Constitution, and, as a result, it does not comply with constitutional criteria.

• 대한임상독성학회지
• /
• 제3권1호
• /
• pp.1-10
• /
• 2005

Gastric lavage is now known to be ineffective, unnecessary or hazardous in some circumstances where it used to be performed as a routine. This article concerns the medico-legal aspect of forced gastric lavage. The Supreme Court 2005.1.28, 2003da14119 is the case where a patient, who ingested the organophosphate insecticide to attempt suicide and refused lavage. At first we discuss the effectiveness or hazards of lavage because a very high degree of proof -of negligence, not error of clinical judgment - would be required. Lavage, with or without the informed consent, performed negligently which result in harm could, of course, give rise to a claim in negligence. A doctor might also be held negligent in failing to perform an act which he/she had a duty to perform.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.199-247
• /
• 2012

According to the review and analysis of medical cases that are assigned to the Supreme Court and all local High Court in 2011 and that are presented in the media, it was found that the following categories were taken seriously, medical and pharmaceutical product liability, the third principle of trust between medical institutions, negligence and causation estimation, responsibility limit, the meaning of medical records and related judgment of disturbed substantiation, Oriental doctors' duties to explain the procedures, IMS events, whether one can claim for each medical care operated by non-physician health care institutions to the nonmedical domain in the National Health Insurance Corporation, and the basis of norms for each claim. In the cases related to medical pharmaceutical product liability, Supreme Court alleviated burden of proof for accidents with medical and pharmaceutical products prior to the practice of Product Liability Law and onset the point of negative prescription as the time of damage strikes to condition feasibility of the specific situation. In the cases related to the 3rd principle of trust between medical institutions, the Supreme Court refused to sentence the doctor who has trusted the judgment of the same third-party doctors the violations of the care duty. With respect to proof of a causal relationship and damages in a medical negligence case, the Supreme Court decided that it is unjust to deny negligence by the materials of causal relationship rejecting the original verdict and clarified that the causal relationship shall not deny the reasons to limit doctors' responsibilities. In order not put burden on patients with disadvantages in which medical records and the description of the practice or the most fundamental and important evidence to prove negligence and causation are being neglected, the Supreme Court admitted in the hospital's responsibility for the case of the neonate death of suffocation without properly listed fetal heart rate and uterine contraction monitor. On the other hand, the Seoul Western District Court has admitted alimony for altering and forging medical records. With respect to doctors' obligations to description, the Supreme Court decided that it is necessary to explain the foreseen risks by the combination of oriental and western medicines emphasizing the right of patient's self-determination. However, questions have arisen whether it is realistically feasible or not. In a case of an unlicensed doctor performing intramuscular stimulation treatment (IMS), the Supreme Court put off its decision if it was an unlicensed medical practice as to put limitation of eastern and western medical practices, but it declared that IMS practice was an acupuncture treatment therefore the plaintiff's conduct being an illegal act. In the future, clear judgment on this matter should be made. With respect to the claim of bills from non-physical health care institutions, the Supreme Court decided to void it for the implementation of the arrangement is contrary to the commitments made in the medical law and therefore, it is invalid to claim. In addition, contrast to the private healthcare professionals, who are subject to redemption according to the National Healthcare Insurance Law, the Seoul High Court explicitly confirmed that the non-professionals who receive the tort operating profit must return the unjust enrichment and have the liability for damages. As mentioned above, a relatively wide range of topics were discussed in medical field of 2011. In Korea's health care environment undergoing complex changes day by day, it is expected to see more diverse and in-depth discussions striding out to the development in the field of health care.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제9권2호
• /
• pp.181-207
• /
• 2008

With recent emphasis on evidence based medicine, clinical practice guidelines are seen as a potential mechanism by which unify various managerial and professional approaches to improving the quality of care. The development process of guidelines has been the subject of much research. and it is need translating the medical evidence of research into a clinical practice guidelines. the gathered evidence needs to be interpreted into a clinical, public health, policy, or payment context. The term 'clinical practice guidelines' can evoke a diverse range of responses from healthcare personnel. Clinical practice guidelines are increasingly used in patient management but some clinicians are not familiar with their origin or appropriate applications. Understanding the limitations as well as benefits of CPG could enable clinicians to have clearer view of the place of guidelines in every practice. In the context of increasing complaints and litigation in healthcare, the legal implications of clinical practice guidelines are of increasing importance. Clinical practice guidelines could, in theory, influence the manner in which the courts establish negligence by suggesting the doctor breached the duty of care by failing to provide the required standard of medical care. In several studies, the CPGs were relevent to and played a pivotal role in the proof of negligence. Much depends on the quality of guidelines and the tools developed and the authoritativeness of a guideline. Recently, there are several opinions the court also should review the validity and reliability of expert testimony including medical evidence. and widespread use of guidelines in malpractice lawsuit could lead the physicians to greater compliance with guidelines in the long term. In conclusion, Health care reformers, physicians as well as guidelines developers should understand that guidelines have both medical and legal aspects as a double-edges sword. so clinicians, legal representatives and decision-makers should not defer unduly to guidelines.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제7권2호
• /
• pp.9-74
• /
• 2006

Due to the awareness of their rights for medical liability and the advancement of legal principles, it becomes also not hard to find those who seek damages against hospitals, doctors and nurses for the suicide committed under the protection of psychiatric institute in Korea these days. Judgements on these kinds of cases are not enough yet, so that it may be too early to try to find principles used in these cases, however it is hardly wrong to read following things from above cases. That is, to gain the case, plaintiffs should show (1) there exists an obligation of "due care"(there is a special relation between patients and hospitals), (2) the duty is violated on the basis of the applicable standard of care, (3) whatever injures or damages are sustained are proximately caused by the breach of duty and (4) the plaintiff suffers compensable damages. To specific, whether a psychiatric institute was liable for wrong death or not depends upon the patients conditions, circumstances and the extent of the danger the patients poses to himself or herself; in short, the foreseeability of self-inflicted harm(the doctor should have or could reasonably have foreseen the patient's suicide and the doctor's negligence actually caused the suicide). In this context if a patient exhibit strong suicidal tendencies, constant observation should be required. Negligence has been found not exist, however, when a patient abruptly and unexpectedly dashes from an attendant and jumps out a window or otherwise attempts to injure himself or herself. And the standard of conduct that is required to meet the obligation of "due care" is based on what the "reasonable practitioner" would do in like circumstances. The standard is not one of excellence or superior practice; it only re quires that the physician exercise that degree of skill and care that would be expected of the average qualified practitioner practicing under like circumstances. Most of these principles have been established at cases of the U.S.A and Japan. In this article you can also find the legal organizations of medical liability and medical contacts on the suicide of patients who have psychiatric diseases under Korean negligence law.

• 대한예방의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 대한예방의학회 2001년도 제53차 추계 학술대회 연제집
• /
• pp.367-367
• /
• 2001

• 의료법학
• /
• 제16권2호
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2015

수술행위는 신체에 대한 침습을 포함하는 것이므로 의료인은 수술주체와 수술행위의 내용을 충분히 설명하여 환자가 그 수술을 받을 것인지의 여부를 선택하도록 하여야 하고, 이는 헌법 제10조에서 규정한 개인의 인격권과 행복추구권에 의하여 보호되는 환자의 자기결정권에 해당한다. 미국에서는 '대리수술'의 경우 폭행에 해당한다고 판단한 사례가 있으나, 국내에서는 아직까지 수술의사에 대한 상해죄 등을 인정한 사례가 없고, 수술행위는 환자의 신체에 대한 적대적인 손상행위가 아니므로 상해죄로 처벌하기 어려운 면이 있다. 또한 환자의 '가정적 승낙'을 폭넓게 인정하는 판례의 입장에 따르면 의사의 전단적 의료행위에 대하여 업무상과실치사상죄로 처벌하기도 어려우므로, 환자의 자기결정권 강화를 위하여 의사의 설명의무를 의료법 등에 명문화하고, 대리수술 등 전단적 의료행위에 대하여 별도의 처벌규정을 입법화할 필요가 있다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제16권2호
• /
• pp.159-193
• /
• 2015

병원감염 사례에 관한 판결의 주류적 태도는 병원감염 발생으로 인한 손해의 분담을 사실상 환자 측에 전가하는 문제가 있다고 판단되므로, 손해의 공평 타당한 분담을 그 지도 원리로 하는 손해배상제도의 이념에 비추어 환자 측의 증명책임을 대폭 완화하기 위한 방법을 강구할 필요성이 있다. 이와 관련하여 진료계약을 민법상 전형계약으로 규정하고, 병원감염과 같은 의료 측이 전적으로 지배할 수 있었던 경우에는 일반적 진료상 위험이 실현된 때 진료자의 오류가 추정된다고 명문으로 과실추정규정을 둔 독일민법을 검토하였다. 진료계약은 매우 빈번하고 광범위하게 일반 국민의 실생활에서 체결되고 있으며, 그로 인한 분쟁도 다양하게 발생하고 있으므로, 진료계약을 독일과 같이 민법의 전형계약으로 규정함으로써 계약 내용과 분쟁 발생 시 증명책임 등에 관해 규율할 필요성이 있다. 병원감염 사건의 경우 법률에 의해 과실을 추정하고, 병원감염 예방을 위한 노력을 철저히 시행한 기관에 한하여 병원감염 사고로 인한 손해가 발생한 경우 그 비용을 지원하도록 사회보험을 통한 제도적 보완이 필요하다고 생각되며, 향후 이에 관한 면밀한 연구와 검토가 요구된다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제19권2호
• /
• pp.3-40
• /
• 2018

예전부터 일본에서 의료사고가 형사사건으로 취급되는 경우는 드물었다. 하지만 요코하마시립대학병원과 같은 중대한 의료과오가 발생한 이후 검사가 의료과오를 기소하는 태도를 보이고 있다. 의료사고는 의료관계자간 역할분담의 형태가 과실 인정에서 중요한 하나의 요소가 된다. 요코하마시립병원사건에서는 환자의 동일성확인에 관하여 의료관계자 사이에 역할분담이 확립되지 않은 경우에는 관계자 전원이 환자의 동일성을 확인하여야 할 의무가 있다고 하였다. 또 사이타마 의과대학병원사건에서는 치료에 신중할 필요가 있는 중대한 증례에 관해서는 그 증례를 담당하는 주치의 뿐 만 아니라 대학병원의 과장도 치료방침에 관하여 확인할 의무가 있다고 하였다. 현립 오오노병원사건에서 무죄판결이 내려진 이후는 형사소추에 신중을 기할 필요가 있다는 목소리가 강해지고 있다. 이러한 상황 속에서 후생노동성은 의료사고방지를 위해 의료사고조사제도를 도입하여 의료사고에 제3자기관에 의한 검증의 강화를 도모하고 있다.