On Medical Damage Identification Of Professional Responsibility

Since the 1980s, the economic and social development, as well as the fast of democracy and the rule of construction step by step, gradually increasing medical malpractice, hospital and patient both legal weapons, their rights and interests of the consultations, repeatedly arguing in court operations. However learn medical ignorance of the law of the people, learning the law doesn't understand medical, medical dispute depends heavily on medical damage identification. At present, our medical malpractice is basically a practice of "dual system" of the identification system, that is, medical malpractice and judicial appraisal. Due to the existing legislation on identification of the person as a result of incorrect identification of causing harm to the Party requested shall bear civil liability provisions almost a blank, which leads to the identification of the person is too large and identification of arbitrariness, in real life emerging medical malpractice cheat, injuring the interests of patients, damage to the medical expertise system lost its should be authoritative, credible and credibility significantly lower that the public's trust.At the present stage, to medical malpractice identification system for major reform of many practical problems. This article from the identification of the person who analyzes professional liability point of view, put forward in the framework of the existing system, an expert in the identification process due to intentional or negligent services provided by damage caused by defects, pursue their professional responsibility. Medical malpractice professional responsibility in the identification, identification of the person is in the identification process due to intentional or negligent services provided by damage caused by defects of civil liability. The nature of professional liability in tort, belonging to apply fault liability as the doctrine of mistake of using objective standards, the implementation of the rules of the presumption of fault. Experts should be subject to identify from the existing institutions, identification of persons responsible as well as gradually changed to identification of human responsibility, institutional responsibility. Strengthening the supervisory and regulatory mechanisms, a clear testimony of obligations. Improvement of laws, regulations, related to accountability, identification of civil responsibility, maximize the results of scientific character and impartiality.In reality, medical professional liability damage identification problems mainly: first of all, the responsibility of a flaw in the body finds that, in order to identify bodies as civil responsibility, often leads to identification of institutions and identification of the person cannot be a clear distinction between responsibility. Secondly, the obligation of testimony is not clear, which led to the identification of the person's appearance in our country is low, the review of medical harm testimonial lack effective cross-examination. Once again, a vulnerability exists in the laws and regulations, with a blank for medical malpractice identification officers liability only criminal responsibility and administrative responsibility, civil liability, or a blank. This article by studying medical damage identification system related concepts, history, medical malpractice, identification, health damage comparison of forensic expertise, as well as in the common law duty of expert witnesses and the civil law specialists in the identification of the person responsible for comparative analysis, identification of experts responsible for suggestions, to resolve disputes, find a way out-patient conflict mitigation. In the specific measures, the appraiser should appear on the contents of the certificate subject's cross-examine accepted, on the negligent or wrongful act issued by the conclusion of which the parties to proceedings of adverse consequences, the appraiser should bear personal liability for tort liability in the nature of experts, should be used as the fault of imputation, and the identification of the fault on the use of the presumption of fault.