The Judgment Standard Of Medical Technology Damage

In2010, the Tort Law of the People’s Republic of China was promulgated,which has unified the basic types of medical damage, the medical technologydamage, medical ethics damage and Medical product damage, and the word“medical technology damage” occurs in medical disputes in China’s judicial practice.The new law has unified the concept of liability for medical damage, the basic typesof medical damage, and the compensation standard for personal injury. However, theissues in the medical injury determination, which is a focus of controversy is thepoint of medical tort cases, are still not clearly defined. What is the medicaltechnology damage? And what is the judgment standard of medical technologydamage? This paper started with these questions.Chapter1mainly describes the concept, the legislative origin and characteristicof medical technology damage, and the differentiation of the related definitions. Itcould be divided into three sections. The first section is a discussion of the conceptand characteristic of medical damage, thus, we can differentiate the medicaltechnology damage from the medical ethics damage and medical products damage.The second section exposes the source of the concept of medical technology damagefrom the point of legislation. The third section differentiates and analyzes, from theconceptual standpoint, both distinction and connection the related concepts, such as medical negligence, medical mistakes, medical errors, medical malpractice, medicaltort, medical injury, medical accidents and medical disputes.Chapter2mainly describes the elements of the medical technology damage, toclearly identify the content of the medical technology damage. This chapter isdivided into three sections. The first section discusses the concept of the medictechnology fault and the duty of care of medical technology, and the changes ofmedical technology fault from subjective to the objective. The second sectiondiscusses the six different classification of the medical technology obligation. Thethird section classified the content of the medical technology obligation, so as todetermine the judgment standard of medical technology damage.Chapter3analysis the judgment standard of medical technology fault, based onthe cases. This chapter is divided into three sections: the first section, combining thecases, expounds the specific standard of the existing medical technology faults in thephysicians’ diagnosis and treatment processes. It discusses the possible faults in thespecific behavior of the physician in three phases, diagnosis phase, treatment phaseand nursing phase respectively. And among them, nursing phase can be dividedfurther by different behaviors such as determination of treatment options, injection,operation, anesthesia, blood collection, transfusion, radiation treatment and drugusage, etc. The second section addresses the abstract judgment standards of themedical technology faults, in contrast to the practices of the United States and Japan,providing a clearer understanding of our country’s abstract determination standards.The third section gives perfect recommendations according to the two differentstandards, based on the information before, thus give reasonable suggestions on thejudgment standard of medical technology damages.