Research On The Conflict Between Rights From "self-dialysis Room" Event

A group of uremic patients because can not afford the expensive hospital fees, spontaneously formed a self-dialysis unit, bought crude instrument, making dialysis treatment in the absence of medical professionals, tenacious living in an almost forgotten corner. However, Tongzhou District, Beijing Health Bureau ban the self-dialysis unit in accordance with relevant regulations. This matter by the media, the public uproar. Self-dialysis room ban, the life of uremic patients may be unable to continue; Self-dialysis unit is not banned, do not comply with the relevant laws and regulations. Dilemma propositions are arise, because the legitimate rights of the two overlapping, in a state of confrontation and conflict, the two rights realize is impossible. This is a rights issue of conflict, inadequate rule of law in socialist China, conflict of rights is prevailing in real life and judicial practice, but the conflict of rights is often overlooked. This paper attempts to introduce the conflict of rights theory to analyze and solve the "self-dialysis room" incident.This article is divided into four parts: the first part of the introduction, the basic self-dialysis unit incident case. Mianzhu shipped with the worst hit victims of looting of material are exempt from legal punishment incident to do comparison, leads to the conflict between rights to discuss.The second part, are there conflict between rights in this case? By syllogism form, the health sector against acts legal? Self-care behavior of patients with uremia have legitimate? If both are legitimate, what is the right of the conflict? The third part, if there has the conflict of rights, then why creates conflict between rights? Part IV, how to resolve the conflict between rights?...