:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:醫師執行預立醫療決定的刑事責任
書刊名:輔仁法學
作者:張麗卿 引用關係
作者(外文):Chang, Liching
出版日期:2017
卷期:53
頁次:頁1-42
主題關鍵詞:病人自主預立醫療決定善終安樂死刑事責任Patient autonomyAdvanced directiveADGood deathEuthanasiaCriminal liability
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(4) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:40
  • 點閱點閱:7
2016年1月,台灣通過亞洲第一部病人自主權利法(下稱本法),使重症病人對於善終的追求,具有法律的依據。具體來說,成年人可以預立醫療決定,如果未來不幸成為末期病人、植物人、極重度失智、不可逆的昏迷狀態,或以當前醫療水準無法醫治的痛苦疾病時,且經醫師專業判斷認定,則可以依據預立醫療決定,按照病人的意願,終止、撤除或不施行維持生命的醫療或灌食。本文探討,病人自主權利法在實踐上可能發生的刑事責任。醫師依照合法的程序,完成病人的意願,放棄醫療,使病人得到善終,可能構成刑法第275條受囑託殺人的構成要件,但是本法於第14條第5項規定:「不負刑事責任」;第14條第3項規定:「得不施行」,皆得作為免除醫師刑事責任的依據,而可以排除違法性。因為行為是否違法,必須從整體的法律秩序判斷。本法既然允許醫師在法定程序下醫療或不醫療,而且規定醫師不負刑事責任,醫師的行為即不違法,這是典型的「依法令的行為」,然而,對於原本仍有救助可能的生命,為何能夠立法同意醫師放棄,應有加以深究的必要。本法雖然要於2019年方才施行,在施行前必須審慎思量,希望本法正式上路時,真正能為醫病取得雙贏。
On January 2016, the first Patient Autonomy Act (the Act) in Asia has been passed in Taiwan, which allows critical illness patients to have legal ground pursuing good death. Specifically, an adult have a right to make Advanced Directives. If the adult who makes Advanced Directives unfortunately becomes a terminal illness patient, a resident with persistent vegetative state, a patient with profound Neurocognitive Disorder, a patient in irreversible coma, or a patient suffers from painful disease that cannot be cured under current medical standard, a doctor may terminate, withdraw, or not apply his Life-sustaining Treatment or feeding according to the will of the patient after the professional judgement by the doctor. This Article makes an approach to criminal liability that might be occurred after the Act put into practice. A doctor who abandons medical treatment to accomplish the patient’s will of good death according to the legal process may fulfill the legal elements of the offense of entrusted murder prescribed in Article 275 of Criminal Code. Nevertheless, in compliance with the provision of Article 14 section 5 of the Act, the doctor in former situation "does not bear criminal liability," meanwhile the doctor in later situation "may not apply it" in compliance with the provision of Article 14 section 3 of the Act. Both two sections exempt the doctors from criminal liability as the grounds of legal justification. That is because whether the conduct is illegal, it is judged from the entire order of laws. Since the Act exempts the doctor who enact or not according to the legal process from criminal liability and the conduct of the doctor is not illegal, this is a typical kind of "conduct performed in accordance with law or order." However, for those lives with possibilities to be rescued originally, it needs to go further into that why can we make laws allow doctors to abandon such medical treatments. The Act is still necessary to be deliberated profoundly before it taking effect in 2019, and hopefully, it would really achieve win-win outcome for the patient and the doctor then.
期刊論文
1.林萍章(20110315)。從《安寧緩和醫療條例》之「親屬死亡同意權」談病人自主權之突變。臺灣法學雜誌,172,55-58。  延伸查詢new window
2.王志嘉(20121200)。末期病人醫療常規--臺灣高等法院高雄分院九十六年度醫上更(一)字第二號刑事判決評釋。月旦法學,211,232-256。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.林東茂(20150300)。死亡協助的刑法問題。高大法學論叢,10(2),93-97+99-117+119-121。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.張麗卿(20150515)。醫療常規與專斷醫療的刑法容許性--評析拒絕輸血案。臺灣法學雜誌,272,15-31。  延伸查詢new window
5.楊秀儀(19991100)。誰來同意?誰作決定?--從「告知後同意法則」談病人自主權的理論與實際:美國經驗之考察。臺灣法學會學報,20,367-406。  延伸查詢new window
6.李壽星(2013)。不施行心肺復甦術法:《紐約不施行心肺復甦術法》與臺灣地區「安寧緩和醫療條例」的比較。金陵法律評論,2013(春)。  延伸查詢new window
7.許澤天(20161200)。消極死亡協助與病人自主決定權--德國學說、立法與實務的相互影響。臺北大學法學論叢,100,179-243。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.陳秀丹(2012)。回歸醫療本質,讓愛真誠流動。綠主張,110。  延伸查詢new window
9.Hilgendorf, Eric(2007)。Zur Strafwürdigkeit von Sterbehilfegesellschaften: aktuelle Strafbarkeitsprobleme im Kontext der assistierten Selbsttötung。Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik,15。  new window
10.Saan, Ruth Rissing-van(2011)。Strafrechtliche Aspekte der aktiven Sterbehilfe: Nach dem Urteil des 2. Strafsenats des BGH v. 25.6.2010–2 StR 454/09。ZIS。  new window
11.Roxin, Claus(2013)。Tötung auf Verlangen und Suizidteilnahme。GA。  new window
12.Kubiciel, Michael(2010)。BGH, Urt. v. 25.6.2010-2 StR 454/09, Zur Strafbarkeit des Abbruchs künstlcher Ernährung。ZJS。  new window
13.Kubiciel, Michael(2009)。Tötung auf Verlangen und assistierter Suizid als selbstbestimmtes Sterben?。JuristenZeitung,64(12),600-608。  new window
14.Hilgendorf, Eric(2014)。Zur Strafwürdigkeit organisierter Sterbehilfe。JuristenZeitung。  new window
研究報告
1.(2015)。病人自主權利法草案修正動議(委員會紀錄)。台北:立法院公報處。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.王皇玉(2011)。刑法上的生命、死亡與醫療。承法數位文化有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
2.Lackner、Kühl(2014)。StGB。  new window
3.Gössel, Karl Heinz、Dölling, Dieter(2004)。Strafrecht Besonderer Teil。  new window
4.Maurach, Reinhart、Schroeder, Friedrich-Christian、Maiwald, Manfred(2009)。Strafrecht Besonderer Teil。  new window
5.Rengier, Rudolf(2014)。Strafrecht Besonderer Teil。  new window
6.Wessels, Johannes、Hettinger, Michael(2015)。Strafrecht Besonderer Teil。Heidelberg。  new window
7.山中敬一(2014)。医事刑法概論(1):序論.医療過誤。成文堂。  延伸查詢new window
8.Hilgendorf, Eric(2016)。Einführung in das Medizinstrafrecht。München:C. H. Beck。  new window
9.町野朔(1996)。犯罪各論の現在。東京:有斐閣。  延伸查詢new window
10.Schönke、Schröder(2014)。Strafgesetzbuch。  new window
11.青柳文雄、安富潔(1989)。刑事裁判と国民性:医療編。東京:信山社。  延伸查詢new window
12.甲斐克則(2004)。尊厳死と刑法:医事刑法研究。東京:成文堂。  延伸查詢new window
13.井田良(2015)。刑法各論:新.論点講義シリーズ。東京:弘文堂。  延伸查詢new window
14.張麗卿(2014)。醫療人權與刑法正義。元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.久々湊晴夫、旗手俊彦(2009)。はじめての医事法。東京:成文堂。  延伸查詢new window
16.王志嘉(2014)。醫師、病人誰說的算?:病人自主之刑法基礎理論。元照。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.張麗卿(2016)。病人自主權利法:善終的抉擇。臺北醫法論壇(XV):實務判決與實證研究。臺北榮民總醫院。  延伸查詢new window
2.Roxin, Claus(2010)。Zur strafrechtlichen Beurteilung der Sterbehilfe。Handbuch des Medizinstrafrechts。  new window
3.Rosenau, Hennning(2011)。Aktive Sterbehilfe。Strafrecht als Scientia Universalis: Festschrift für Claus Roxin zum 80. Geburtstag am 15. Mai 2011。  new window
4.Fischer, Thomas(2011)。Direktive Sterbehilfe: Anmerkung zur Privatisierung des Lebensschutzes。Strafrecht als Scientia Universalis: Festschrift für Claus Roxin zum 80. Geburtstag am 15. Mai 2011。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE