從馬偕醫院肩難產案談醫療行為在消費者保護法上的適用

Application of Consumer Protection Law to Medical Care in the Shoulder Dystocia Case of Mackay Memorial Hospital

陳文洲(Wen-Chou Chen) ； 吳淑莉(Shu-Li Wu)

《安泰醫護雜誌》 14卷3期 (2008/10) Pp. 169-187

https://doi.org/10.7078/TSMHMNJN.200810.0169

摘要

醫療行為到底是否適用消費者保護法，馬偕醫院肩難產乙案雖然沒有得到具體答案但卻是一個里程碑。消費者保護法的立法相當粗糙，對“服務”並沒有明確的定義、規範與說明。雖然各行各業都有其風險存在，但為了保護消費者，法學界認為不應該將醫療行為排除於消費者保護法之外。然而與其它各行各業不同的是，醫療行為的風險並非完全來自於醫療提供者，患者本身的疾病及其因人而異的體質，就會產生風險。強行以法律規定由醫療提供者負擔雙方的風險，並不符合法律上的公平正義原則。
民國93年醫療法修正案通過以後，明定：「醫療機構及其醫事人員因執行業務致生損害於病人，以故意或過失為限，負損害賠償責任。」從此排除了醫療行為的無過失責任，但在其他範圍是否適用消費者保護法，仍然莫衷一是，難有定論！

關鍵字

肩難產 ； 消費者保護法 ； 醫療法修正案

並列摘要

It is doubtful whether the consumer protection act can be applied to medical care. Even though we didn't get any answers from the suit in the shoulder dystocia case of Mackay memorial hospital, it was a milestone. There is no exact definition or description of the ”service” in the consumer protection act. All business contains uncertain risks. In order to protect consumers, jurisprudents insist that consumer protection act should be applied to the medical care. However, the risks of medical care are different from other industry; furthermore, they originate both from providers and patients. The law forces the providers to take both of the risks does not meet the justice.
In 2004, the medical law amendments provided: The medical institutions and medical personnel shall recover the patient's injury or damage only with their intention or negligence. Since then, strict liability does not serve for medical care. But, there are still many disagreements retained between medical care and consumer protection act.

並列關鍵字

shoulder dystocia ； consumer protection act ； medical law amendments