开启医疗损害鉴定的新篇章——《医疗纠纷预防和处理条例》医疗损害鉴定模式
|
摘要
我国医疗纠纷困境已经影响医疗机构的正常诊疗秩序,人们迫切希望有一种全新的医疗纠纷处理模式,《医疗纠纷预防和处理条例》的出台满足了人们的这一期盼,其中构建的新的医疗损害鉴定模式更是给医疗纠纷的处理带来希望。本文回顾了长期以来存在的医学会和法医鉴定二元化模式存在的弊端,总结了条例确定的医疗损害鉴定新模式的主要内容,提出下一步相关部门制定医疗损害鉴定管理办法需要解决的问题,作者对新的医疗损害鉴定模式予以充分肯定,对医疗损害鉴定充满着期待。
Due to that dilemma of medical tangle in china has already affected normal diagnosis and treat work,people urgently hope that there is a new processing pattern of medical tangle.Promulgation of The medical dispute prevention and handling regulations fulfills people's expectation,that the new medical damage appraisal has been established,among that,the new pattern is also to bring hopes for the treatment of medical tangle.The essay reviews the drawbacks of the dual pattern of medical association and forensic identification and summarizes main parts of the regulation establishing the new medical damage appraisal pattern.It also raises problems,which need to be solved by the relevant departments in formulating the management measures of medical damage appraisal.For the new medical damage appraisal pattern,this essay fully affirms it and looks forward to medical damage appraisal in the future.
Due to that dilemma of medical tangle in china has already affected normal diagnosis and treat work,people urgently hope that there is a new processing pattern of medical tangle.Promulgation of The medical dispute prevention and handling regulations fulfills people's expectation,that the new medical damage appraisal has been established,among that,the new pattern is also to bring hopes for the treatment of medical tangle.The essay reviews the drawbacks of the dual pattern of medical association and forensic identification and summarizes main parts of the regulation establishing the new medical damage appraisal pattern.It also raises problems,which need to be solved by the relevant departments in formulating the management measures of medical damage appraisal.For the new medical damage appraisal pattern,this essay fully affirms it and looks forward to medical damage appraisal in the future.
引文
[1]李平龙,肖鹏.我国医疗损害鉴定制度研究述评(2002-2012)[J],证据科学,2013,21(2):229-239.
[2]肖柳珍.当前医疗损害鉴定制度存在问题与对策[J].证据科学,2010,18(4):425-433.
[3]陈小嫦,李大平.医疗损害鉴定主体改革刍议[J].证据科学,2011,19(3):299-306.
[4]刘鑫,梁俊超.论医疗损害技术鉴定危机与改革[J].证据科学,2010,18(4):409-424.
[5]肖柳珍.医疗损害鉴定研究:江苏模式与北京模式比较——基于《侵权责任法》的视角分析[J].证据科学,2011,19(3):290-298.
[6]刘鑫,梁俊超.论我国医疗损害技术鉴定制度构建[J].证据科学,2011,19(3):261-275.
[7]董娟,刘子龙,付佳旗,等.358例医疗纠纷法医临床学鉴定分析[J].中国法医学杂志,2014,29(5):492-494.
[8]张玲莉,李强,陈晓瑞,等.25例医疗纠纷的法医临床学鉴定回顾性分析[J].中国法医学杂志,2005,20(2):103-105.
[2]肖柳珍.当前医疗损害鉴定制度存在问题与对策[J].证据科学,2010,18(4):425-433.
[3]陈小嫦,李大平.医疗损害鉴定主体改革刍议[J].证据科学,2011,19(3):299-306.
[4]刘鑫,梁俊超.论医疗损害技术鉴定危机与改革[J].证据科学,2010,18(4):409-424.
[5]肖柳珍.医疗损害鉴定研究:江苏模式与北京模式比较——基于《侵权责任法》的视角分析[J].证据科学,2011,19(3):290-298.
[6]刘鑫,梁俊超.论我国医疗损害技术鉴定制度构建[J].证据科学,2011,19(3):261-275.
[7]董娟,刘子龙,付佳旗,等.358例医疗纠纷法医临床学鉴定分析[J].中国法医学杂志,2014,29(5):492-494.
[8]张玲莉,李强,陈晓瑞,等.25例医疗纠纷的法医临床学鉴定回顾性分析[J].中国法医学杂志,2005,20(2):103-105.