:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:病人善終自主權之研究--借鑑臺灣法規範反思大陸立法之趨勢
書刊名:高大法學論叢
作者:許光
作者(外文):Xu, Guang
出版日期:2017
卷期:12:2
頁次:頁1-67+69-80
主題關鍵詞:病人善終自主權拒絕維生醫療權安寧緩和醫療條例病人自主權利法大陸立法方向Patient autonomy for life ends appropriatelyThe right to refuse LSTHospice palliative care actPatient autonomy actMainland China's legislating direction
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:107
  • 點閱點閱:9
當個人身患絕症遭受疾病痛苦折磨時,其如何走向終點及社會作何反應,則是全人類所共同面對的重大終極問題之一。病人自主核心利益實為病人如何善終問題。 病人善終自主權是指病人在罹患絕症時能夠依據自己真實意願,自主決定在醫師協助下自然而無痛苦或較小痛苦走向生命終點的權利。從病人善終自主權利現階段發展情況來看,其實質為病人拒絕維生醫療權。 目前,病人善終自主權遇到了新的挑戰:一是醫療提 供者終止醫療的權利與病人繼續維生醫療延長生命的權利 之間的衝突;二是未成年病人有無善終自主權的問題;三 是如何平衡孕婦善終自主權與胎兒生命權利之間的對立。 臺灣形成了比較系統的、完善的醫療法律體系,安寧緩和醫療條例與病人自主權利法是保障病人善終自主權的專法。安寧緩和醫療條例允許末期病人可以立意願書選擇安寧緩和醫療(包括拒絕CPR),賦予「末期病人」自然善終的法源,是臺灣第一個直接規範「善終自主權」的成文法。病人自主權利法是亞洲第一部病人善終自主權利法, 再次昭示「拒絕醫療是病人基本權益,是普世人權」,本法最大特點是擴大了善終自主權適用主體範圍,為五種特定情形。通過比較發現,兩部專法立法主軸始終未變,皆為實現病人善終自主權。在探索如何解決人類終結生命實現善終的終極命題上,二者皆起到積極的推動作用,表現上各有千秋。 大陸醫療法律體系缺少醫療法,拒絕維生醫療權尚未明定,建議借鑑臺灣法規範反思大陸立法之趨勢,提出大陸迫切需要制定醫療法與安寧緩和醫療條例,以保障大陸人民所缺失的善終自主權。
This is an important and final issue for all human beings, in which the person decides how to end his life when he or she suffers from disease. The core interests of patient autonomy is how to life ends appropriately. Patient autonomy for life ends appropriately is the right to person decides voluntarily to end his or her life with physician-assisted suicide for his or her incurable illness. The essence of right is to refuse treatment. Now, Patient autonomy is facing the new challenge: first, the conflict between the physicians' power to make decision to terminate treatment and patient or patient's family requirements to go on treatment; second, if juveniles have the right of life ends appropriately; finally, the counterpose with pregnant women and fetus. There are Hospice Palliative Care Act and Patient Autonomy Act in Taiwan for patient autonomy of life ends appropriately. Hospice Palliative Care Act permits terminally ill patients to refuse the Life-sustaining treatment (LST) withholding or withdrawing according to letter of his or her intent or advance directives (AD), so, this is the first time for Taiwan to have a statue covering the subject of LST. Patient Autonomy Act is first in Asia for life ends appropriately, which broadens patient' scope for five specific circumstances, especially not limited terminally ill patients. Comparing Hospice Palliative Care Act with Patient Autonomy Act, we can infer that they all have ultimate aim to realize patient autonomy for life ends appropriately. They take an active role in realizing human's life ends appropriately, which has its own merits. Mainland China lacks medical law in medical legal system and has no the right to refuse treatment definitely. The paper suggests that take Taiwanese medical legislation as an example for reconsidering the development of medical legislation in Mainland China. Medical Law and Hospice Palliative Care Act are most urgent for Mainland China to protect patient autonomy of life ends appropriately now.
期刊論文
1.邱忠義(20110400)。新修正「安樂緩和醫療條例」之安樂死與尊嚴死評析。軍法專刊,57(2),99-120。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.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
3.葛謹(20100600)。Gillick行為能力--最高法院95年度臺非字第115號刑事判決評釋。醫事法學,17(1),33-40。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.陳榮基(20040900)。安寧緩和醫療條例的實施與困境。臺灣醫學,8(5),684-687。  延伸查詢new window
5.楊秀儀(20130600)。論病人之拒絕維生醫療權:法律理論與臨床實踐。生命教育研究,5(1),1-24。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.吳俊穎(20041100)。壽終正寢?--病患親屬代理決定權的探討。月旦法學,114,155-162。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.李震山(19990700)。從生命權與自決權之關係論生前預囑與安寧照護之法律問題。國立中正大學法學集刊,2,325-350。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.Blackhall, L.、Murphy, S. T.、Frank, G.、Michel, V.、Azen, S.(1995)。Ethnicity and attitudes toward patient autonomy。Journal of the American Medical Association,274(10),820-825。  new window
9.陳子平(20000200)。醫療上「充分說明與同意(Informed Consent)」之法理。東吳法律學報,12(1),47-84。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.吳俊穎、賴惠蓁、陳榮基(20100500)。不施行心肺復甦術之相關法律議題。臺灣醫學,14(3),318-323。  延伸查詢new window
11.楊秀儀(20020900)。病人,家屬,社會:論基因年代病患自主權可能之發展。國立臺灣大學法學論叢,31(5),1-31。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.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
13.葛謹(20090100)。植物人權益和安寧緩和醫療條例之發展。臺灣醫界,52(1),30-38。  延伸查詢new window
14.王斌全、趙曉雲(2008)。知情同意的發展歷史。護理研究,7,1785。  延伸查詢new window
15.申衛星(2015)。醫患關係的重塑與我國《醫療法》的制定。法學,2015(12),79-92。  延伸查詢new window
16.陳冉(2013)。由「尊嚴死」論放棄醫療救治的刑事責任。刑法論叢,2013(1),238-268。  延伸查詢new window
17.朱樂瑩、陳香樺(2015)。終末期患者不予或撤除無效治療文獻綜述。經濟研究導刊,2015(21),322-326。  延伸查詢new window
18.呂建高(2010)。病人自主權的倫理與法理。環球法律評論,2010(6),108-117。  延伸查詢new window
19.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「安寧緩和醫療條例」的比較。金陵法律評論,2013(1),205-233。  延伸查詢new window
20.韋寶平、楊東升(2013)。生前醫療預囑的法理闡釋。金陵法律評論,2013(2),48-62。  延伸查詢new window
21.莫洪憲、楊文博(2011)。醫事刑法學中醫療行為概念的新界定。國家檢察官學院學報,19(2),92-98。  延伸查詢new window
22.莊曉平(2012)。也談醫療的知情同意與個人自由和責任--與蘇力教授商権。自然辯證法通訊,2012(1),116-120。  延伸查詢new window
23.梁根林(2004)。爭取人道死亡的權利--世界範圍內的安樂死運動。比較法研究,2004(3),16-28。  延伸查詢new window
24.趙俊祥、李郁強(20111200)。從病患自主觀點談臨終急救與安寧緩和醫療條例之修正。法學新論,33,115-139。new window  延伸查詢new window
25.劉小平、楊金丹(2015)。死亡權利:自主的迷思與權利的限度。醫學與哲學,2015(5),22-24。  延伸查詢new window
26.劉建利(2013)。死亡的自我決定權與社會決定權--中日安樂死問題的比較研究。法律科學,2013(5),62-71。  延伸查詢new window
27.劉曉燕(2012)。患者知情同意權探析--兼評〈侵權責任法〉第55條、第56條的規定。前沿,2012(10),49-51。  延伸查詢new window
28.韓大元(2011)。論安樂死立法之憲法界限。清華法學,2011(5),24-33。  延伸查詢new window
29.韓政道(20150700)。末期之醫療決定與刑法評價。國立中正大學法學集刊,48,251-296。new window  延伸查詢new window
30.蘇力(2008)。醫療的知情同意與個人自由和責任--從肖志軍拒簽事件切入。中國法學,2008(2),3-27。  延伸查詢new window
31.Abrams, Jamie R.(2014)。The Illusion of Autonomy in Women's Medical Decision-Making。Florida State University Law Review,42(1),1-46。  new window
32.Baily, Mary Ann(2011)。Futility, Autonomy, and Cost in End-of-Life Care。Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics,39(2),172-182。  new window
33.Burcher, Paul(2015)。The Patient-Doctor Relationship: Where Are We Now?。The University of Toledo Law Review,46(3),583-588。  new window
34.Epright, M. Carmela(2010)。Coercing Future Freedom: Consent and Capacities for Autonomous Choice。The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics,38(4),799-806。  new window
35.Laufer-Ukeles, Pamela(2011)。Reproductive Choices and Informed Consent: Fetal Interests, Women's Identity, and Relational Autonomy。American Journal of Law & Medicine,37(4),567-623。  new window
36.Miller, Colin(2015)。Cloning Miranda Why Medical Miranda Supports the Pre-Assertion of Crimianl Miranda Rights。Wisconsin Law Review,5,863-906。  new window
37.Nguyen, Christina Q.(2015)。Death as Liberty。University of San Francisco Law Review,49(1),387-410。  new window
38.Parker, Frederick R. Jr.(2015)。Medical Futility: Defining Patient Rights at the end of life。University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review,37(2),185-234。  new window
39.甘添貴(1998)。緩和醫療行為之適法性。月旦法學雜誌,38,12-13。  延伸查詢new window
40.王皇玉(20090700)。德國醫療刑法論述概說。月旦法學,170,122-144。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.張麗卿(2016)。病人自主權利法--善終的扶擇。臺北醫法論壇(XV)實務判決與實證研究,(會議日期: 2016/05/14),39-61。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.楊月珠(2004)。醫療自主權的法律研究(碩士論文)。華東政法學院。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Bodenheimer, Edgar、鄧正來(1999)。法理學:法律哲學與法律方法。北京:中國政法大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
2.林東茂(2009)。刑法綜覽。北京:中國人民大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
3.Dworkin, Ronald、郭貞伶、陳雅汝(2002)。生命的自主權。商周出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.康均心(2009)。生命刑法原理。臺北:元照。  延伸查詢new window
5.王皇玉(2011)。刑法上的生命、死亡與醫療。臺北:承法。  延伸查詢new window
6.古柏曼‧哈茨班德、廖月娟(2013)。醫療抉擇。臺北:遠見天下文化。  延伸查詢new window
7.索甲仁波切、鄭振煌(2005)。西藏生死書。臺北:張老師文化。  延伸查詢new window
8.Pojman, Louis P.、魏德驥(1997)。解構死亡:死亡、自殺、安樂死與死刑的剖析。臺北:桂冠。  延伸查詢new window
9.張麗卿(2014)。醫療人權與刑法正義。元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.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
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE