過勞一直是職業安全與衛生法規中重點強調，但卻無法杜絕爭議的議題，其原因出在於過勞並非是一法律名詞，也非醫學疾病，更不是能用文字清楚且清楚的定義。它是一個社會學的現象，肇因起於醫學上的各種疾病交互作用，生理機轉加以心理上的精神負荷，多重因素導致下的社會名詞。筆者畢業於慈濟大學護理學系，之後就讀文化大學法律所，因此本篇文章希望能以醫學的角度切入過勞議題，探究法律定義上的合理性是否切進醫學上的病程演進，以評價法規的適切性。同時，文末以醫學法規中的死亡定義，和過勞的死亡加以比較，提出一些淺見和拙論，期許拋磚引玉，吸引更多學者一起探究過勞猝死認定之合理性，以架構出安全衛生的勞動市場，降低過勞猝死之認定爭議，讓死者已矣，生者安寧。
Overwork has always been a term commonly mentioned in occupational safety and health regulations, but it cannot eliminate issues of controversy. The reason is that overwork is not a legal term, nor is it a medical condition, and it is even less clear and clear definition. It is a sociological phenomenon. Because of the interaction of various diseases in medicine, the psychiatric physiological mental workload, multiple factors lead to the next social noun. This article hopes to enter into the issue of overwork from a medical point of view, to explore whether the rationality of the definition of the law is cutting into the course of medical development, in order to evaluate the appropriateness of laws and regulations. At the end of the paper, the definition of death in medical regulations is compared with the death from overwork, and some ideas are put forward. It is hoped that more scholars will explore the rationality of the death judgment of labor death to construct a safe and hygienic labor market and reduce the recognition of overwork and death dispute.
