醫療糾紛鑑定與對質詰問權

Testimony of Medical Expert Witness on Medical Malpractice and Right of Confrontation

張麗卿(Li-Ching Chang)

《東吳法律學報》 20卷2期 (2008/10) Pp. 1-28

https://doi.org/10.6416/SLR.200810.0001

摘要

近年來，醫療糾紛逐漸增加，醫病雙方的緊張關係也日益升溫。遺憾的是，醫療糾紛實務上之鑑定機制已經受很大的質疑，且被告醫師的對質詰問權也未落實。醫師雖然都是菁英，但也有能力上的極限，加上醫療行為囿限於人體的不可控制性、醫學的有限性，危險的發生在本質上就很難全然排除與控制。
要求醫師對於一切的醫療糾紛承擔責任，包括民事上的損害賠償、行政上的懲戒處分、甚至刑事責任，是嚴苛而不合理的對待。因為過度苛刻的要求，只會讓醫師形成防衛性的醫療，其結果只有讓醫療品質退步，絕非病患之福。所以在醫療糾紛發生後，如何透過科學的刑事醫療鑑定，以及保障被告醫師的對質詰問權，透過理性辯論，發現事實真相，釐清責任的歸屬，是解決醫療糾紛，避免醫病關係陷入對立緊張的唯一途徑。

關鍵字

醫病關係 ； 醫療糾紛 ； 醫療鑑定 ； 對質詰問權

並列摘要

Recently, with the increasing of the medical malpractice, the Doctor-Patient relationship becomes more and more difficult. Unfortunately, the testimony of medical expert witness has not been so reliable and the accused doctor's right of confrontation is not well protected, either. Although Medical Doctors are all excellent, their abilities also have some limitations. In addition, it is very difficult to avoid all the risks of medical practice because of the complexity of human body and the limitation of medical knowledge.
It is not only too strict but also unreasonable to require the doctor assuming all the responsibilities, including the civil compensation for damage, disciplinary disposition, even the criminal penalty, for all kinds of medical malpractices. When such requirements are too strict, it will let the doctor refuse to treat certain patients who are difficult to be cured and the only result is the regress of healthcare quality. Definitely, it is not the expectation of patients. When the medical malpractice arises, the only method to resolve the malpractice dispute and mitigate the difficulty of Doctor-Patient relationship is to determine that who should be responsible after parties' debate, basing on the scientific testimony of medical expert witness and the protection of accused doctor's right of confrontation.

並列關鍵字

Doctor-Patient relationship ； medical malpractice ； medical expert witness ； right of confrontation

參考文獻

王兆鵬(2007)。辯護權與詰問權。台北:元照。

王兆鵬(2007)。美國刑事訴訟法。台北:元照。

王兆鵬(2006)。刑事訴訟講義。台北:元照。

王兆鵬(2005)。憲法解釋與刑事訴訟─最重要的三則解釋。台灣本土法學雜誌。29-42。

朱柔若、林東龍(2003)。醫療公道如何討？台灣醫療糾紛處理機制弊病之探索。醫事法學。11，31-61。