医师专家责任研究

【作者】 高峰；

【导师】 林刚；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 法律， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 医疗事故纠纷无疑是我国当今社会的热点问题，理论界和实践界对医疗事故的含义、性质、归责原则等众说纷纭，争议很大。国务院于2002年颁布了《医疗事故处理条例》(以下简称《条例》)，对一些具体问题作出了规定，但是这种争议并未消除，反而愈演愈烈，甚至直接影响了《条例》在司法实践中的应用。 我们国家长期以来将医疗事故与交通事故相提并论，认为两者都严重侵犯了人的生命健康等权利，都属于事故责任。但是我认为医疗事故责任实质上属于专家责任的范畴。专家责任是20世纪中后期伴随着对专家(尤其是医师、注册会计师、律师及建筑师)的诉讼增多而发展起来的一类新型责任类型，我国对专家责任的研究起步较晚，但是对专家责任属于一类独立的侵权责任类型，理论界已经达成共识。在由梁彗星研究员作为主持人起草的《中国民法典学者建议稿》(社科院版)和王利明教授作为主持人起草的《中国民法典学者建议稿》(人大版)中都有专家责任的规定。 本文通过分析医师专家责任的性质、归责原则，对当前争议最大的几个问题——医疗事故的性质、医疗事故的归责原则、医学会鉴定的性质等提出了建议。希望能为《条例》的正确适用贡献微薄之力，毕竟正确适用《条例》是解决医疗事故纠纷，缓和医患关系的关键。 本文共分三个部分对医师专家责任的法律问题进行了论述，包括引言、正文和结语，其中正文分为六个部分。 引言部分对本文的写作背景和必要性进行了详细论述，并以此作为全文研究的基石。 正文共包括六个部分： 第一部分对医师专家责任的含义做了分析，首先明确了专家的共有特征，然后指出医师作为社会生活中一类比较重要的专家，在执业当中由于过错产生的责任属于专家责任的范畴，最后分析了医师专家责任的自身特点。 第二部分对医师专家责任的性质进行了研究，提出了建议。对于医师专家责任的性质，我国学者有违约责任、侵权责任、竞合责任和混合责任等观点，本文首先通过比较法的研究，借鉴了英美法系和大陆法系主要国家对专家责任性质的理论研究成果，明确了医师专家责任具有侵权责任与更多还原

【Abstract】 Medical treatment accident, whose definition and nature has been contravertial among the academic circle and practices, is undoubtedly one of the contemporary hotspots in our country. The Regulations on the Treatment of Medical Treatment Accident promulgated by the State Council in 2002 which made some provisions on some specific questions didn’t bring an end to the disputes, or rather, it was making things even worse, which impaired the application of the regulations in judicial practicesIn our country, Medical treatment accident and traffic accident have always been referred to concurrently, both as liability accidents, which seriously harm people’s rights to life and health, etc. However, I hold that medical treatment accident belongs to the scope of expert’s liability, which emerged with the increase of relevant litigations in the latter half of 20 century. The studies on expert’s initiated lately in our country, nevertheless, concensus has been reached by the academic circle on its role as a category of independent liability of tort. The nature and the principles of liabilities allotment of expert’s liability analysed, this dissertation makes suggestions on such most controversial questions as the nature of medical treatment accident principles of liabilities allotment of treatment accident, the nature of the expert’s witness by the medical science academy. the major part of this dissertation consists of six subparts.Part one makes analysis on the definition of expert’s witness. it first makes clear the commons of experts, and then pointed out that a doctor should assume the expert’s liability if he is at fault in his practices. Finally, it makes analysis on the characteristics of expert’s witness.Part two makes analysis on the nature of expert’s liability and put forward relevant suggestions. Based on the results of the studies by major states of continental legal family as well as Anglo-American legal family, It specifies that the expert’s liability combines the natures of the更多还原