【作者】 刘微；

【导师】 胡晓静；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 民商法学（专业学位）， 2016， 硕士

【摘要】 医疗损害责任纠纷是民事诉讼领域一类特殊的侵权纠纷,一直是人民法院审理的重点和难点。因此类纠纷所涉及的医学难题具有专业技术性、复杂性和实践性,司法实务工作人员限于医学知识和临床经验的匮乏很难轻易判定诊疗护理行为是否存在过错及过错之所在。医疗损害鉴定在此类纠纷中发挥着举足轻重的作用,具有深入的研究价值和实践意义。2010年施行的《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》未对我国的医疗损害鉴定制度作出规定,最高人民法院随后发布的《最高人民法院关于适用<中华人民共和国侵权责任法>若干问题的通知》也未进一步统一规范,我国医疗事故鉴定模式与医疗过错鉴定模式并存的混乱局面仍未终结,改革医疗损害鉴定制度势在必行。本文从一名法官的视角,以李某诉某市医院医疗损害责任纠纷案为研究对象,围绕医患双方不同医疗损害鉴定申请这个争议焦点展开论述,通过比较分析医疗事故鉴定模式和医疗过错鉴定模式的优势和不足,提出现行法下本案应进行医疗过错鉴定而不是医疗事故鉴定的结论。但是由于医疗过错鉴定存在鉴定人缺乏资质,鉴定程序不规范,鉴定意见不科学不公正的弊端,进行医疗过错鉴定将严重影响司法裁判结果的正确性和权威性,以司法鉴定机构为主体的医疗过错鉴定仍然不是本案的最佳选择。最后笔者通过进一步分析现行法律规范,衡量医患双方的利益冲突,提出了由医学会作为鉴定主体进行医疗过错鉴定的设想,并将此方案做为本案最终选择的鉴定模式,进而得出本案的审理结果。在结论部分,提出建立以医学会为鉴定主体的统一的医疗损害鉴定制度,并提出了相配套的制度方案。本文主要采用案例分析、比较分析和实证研究的方法,选择的李某诉某市医院医疗损害责任纠纷一案,是能够反映司法审判实务中医疗事故鉴定模式与医疗过错鉴定模式并存带来的程序性争议难题的典型案例。笔者旨在从司法实务的角度,揭露我国当前两种鉴定模式并存现状给司法审判带来的困扰和难题,通过整体分析两种鉴定模式的优势和不足,呼吁快速建立能够满足司法实务需要的以医学会为鉴定主体的一元化医疗损害鉴定制度,以期提高医疗损害责任纠纷的审判质量和效率,促进医疗损害责任纠纷有效解决,推动医患关系和谐稳定健康发展。更多还原

【Abstract】 Medical damage liability disputes is a special kind of infringement in the field of civil litigation, has been the emphasis and difficulty in the people’s court. Because of these kinds of disputes has professional technical, complexity and practicality, the judges are all so lack of medical knowledge and clinical experience that is difficult to determine whether the medical care behavior easily at fault and fault is located. Medical damage appraisal plays an important role in such dispute, has further research value and practical significance. The tort liability act and the supreme people’s court about applicable < the tort liability law of the People’s Republic of China > some problems of notice didn’t form a unified medical damage appraisal system. Still didn’t put an end to still our medical accident appraisal system and medical treatment fault identification system chaos. Reform of the medical damage appraisal system is imperative.This article from the perspective of a judge, researching on Mr Li v. municipal hospital medical liability for damage.Comparing doctors and patients around different medical damage appraisal to apply for this controversy. Through the comparative analysis of medical accident appraisal system and the advantages and disadvantages of medical fault identification system. Designing is put forward under medical treatment fault identification of the case should be not medical accident appraisal conclusion. But due to medical treatment fault identification judicial authentication opinions is not scientific, the disadvantages of injustice, seriously affect the judicial judgment result is scientific and impartiality. But medical treatment fault identification by the judicial authentication institutions are still not the best choice for this case. Finally, the author further analysis of the current legal norms, measuring the doctor-patient conflicts of interest on both side, proposing by the idea of the identification as the main body of medical fault identification. In conclusion, the paper puts forward to establish the identification for the main unified medical damage appraisal system, and proposed the corresponding system solutions.This article mainly uses the case analysis, comparative analysis and empirical research method, choosing namely common disputes in judicial practice are analyzed. To reveal the current normalize the medical damage appraisal system all can’t meet the needs of the trial. Medical damage appraisal system of procedural defects directly affect the nature of judicial justice. Calling for setting up the main body of the unity of medical damage appraisal system rapidly. In order to improve the quality and efficiency of medical damage the judicial authentication opinions, promote the medical damage effectively solve the disputes and harmonious doctor-patient relations stable and healthy development.更多还原