| 摘要: | 醫療過失種類甚多，轉診雖係其中一環，但卻被實務長年以來所忽略，直到邱小妹事件發生後，學說、實務才開始討論有關轉診之刑事責任及轉診制度。本文研究轉診事故，並針對轉診所發生之刑事責任加以釐清，分別探討臨床上常見之轉診類型及風險，進行要件之論述、分析與研究，並進一步分析緊急醫療救護法等相關條文。
「醫療常規」是學說及實務審酌醫療案件最重要的參考依據，也常是醫事鑑定中足以左右法官心證之重要證據。因此，本文除論述我國法，亦大量輔以外國法，以比較法之方式，在了解外國實務運作，法官應如何審酌醫療案件。
判斷轉診過失事故，本文以違反客觀注意義務為核心，並探討醫療義務、臨床裁量、轉診醫師義務與後送醫師義務，試圖找出判斷之標準；判斷不作為轉診事故，本文以保證人地位作為主軸，並輔以轉診不作為犯之進行要件檢討。在前揭章節中，本文皆有以實務上具體發生的案例作為裁判評析，並藉此分析法院之見解。
本文在各個章節試圖對於法制度提出個人不同淺見加以反思，以期望不同意見的碰撞能開啟有效的對話橋梁。
There are many types of medical negligence, and although referral is one of them, it has been ignored by the practice for many years. It was only after the Qiu Xiaomei incident that the criminal liability of referral and the referral system began to be discussed in the theoires and judgments. This article examines referrals and clarifies the criminal liability of referrals, discusses the types and risks of common clinical referrals, discusses, analyzes, and researches the elements, and further analyzes the relevant provisions of the Emergency Medical Services Act.
"The Medical Standard" is the most important reference in theories and judgments when considering medical cases, and it is also an important evidence that can influence the judge's mind in medical identification. Therefore, this article not only discusses Taiwan Act, but also supplements it with foreign Act in order to understand how judges consider medical cases in foreign practice by way of comparative Act.
To judge the accident of negligent referral, this article focuses on the violation of the objective duty of care, and discusses the medical obligation, clinical discretion, the obligation of the referring physician and the obligation of the evacuation physician, in an attempt to find the standard of judgments; to judge the accident of negligent referral, this article focuses on the status of the guarantor as the main axle, and supplements it with the review of the elements of the omission of referral to act as a criminal. In the previous chapters, this article uses specific cases in judgments as the evaluation of decisions and analyzed the opinions of the court.
This paper attempts to reflect on different personal opinions of the legal system in each chapter, hoping that the clash of different opinions can open an effective bridge of dialogues. |
