Analysis Of Liang Prosecuting A People’s Hospital Medical For Liability Disputes

March4,200816am, Liang had a toothache for several days because of his office to the surgeon’s hospital dental extractions.By that hospital dentistry practitioners Huang for extraction. Huang first performed on local anesthesia, but still feel the pain unbearable Liang. Subsequently, Liu, deputy director of dentistry to help fill a local anesthetic for anesthesia, but no less painful Liang. At this point requires Liu served twenty-three days anti-inflammatory drugs back then to extraction. Zhang’s wife suggested a tooth anesthesia, Liang agreed. Dr. Liu, Huang said although never been done verbally anesthesia extractions, but Liang couple to contact the anesthetist has not added to stop the behavior. The hospital anesthesiology assistant practicing doctors under certain strict requirements Zhang, first by Zhang bolus of local anesthetic, after a bolus replaced by Yan Subsequently, Liu carried out for the extraction. But after tooth is unplugged, Liang always unawakened eventually Liang was diagnosed as " hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy ", has been in a persistent vegetative state. The papers in this case as a starting point to introduce this Court finds, and the verdict of the case, made it the focus of controversy, and analyzed their legal issues involved, especially for the doctor’s duty of care legal issues, the status and the presence of States of their duty of care specific requirements and our doctors made a perfect proposal. The paper is divided into five parts:Chapter I, Case presentation and the focus of controversy. v. People’s Court from a county health damage liability disputes as the starting point. through the identification of the facts of the case and the verdict of the case and the two sides introduced proposed focus on legal issues and controversies involved in the paper If the patient is registered and to pay costs associated with the case, the occurrence of personal injury in the course of treatment, the hospital is liable for damages. Here, the medical services contract is to determine whether the doctor-patient relationship exists, whether a basis to start treatment activities, not its premise and foundation. Case, although not registered Liang treatment, but as long as the implementation of the clinic physician behavior should also be considered in patients with hospital formed a physician-patient relationship.Chapter Ⅱ,Legal issues involved in the case analysis. First, from the meaning of the doctor-patient relationship, and the legal basis for the classification of the doctor-patient relationship has been defined. Secondly, the analysis of the causal relationship between doctors, patients and their families with medical malpractice responsibility. Finally, the responsibility for the use of the knowledge points more than the doctor’s responsibility to identify violations of the duty of care and patient families identified in-depth discussions.Chapter Ⅲ, A legal analysis of the case raised the duty of care doctors. This chapter presents the constituent elements of medical liability for damage by the concept of duty of care to doctors, origin, classification and brief description of the legal characteristics, combined with the theory that the damage to the facts, the subjective aspect-the doctor’s fault, the objective aspect-Doctors breach note behavioral and medical practices obligation and the damage causation facts.Chapter Ⅳ, A Comparative Study of the duty of care doctors. This chapter introduced the United Kingdom, the United States and other countries provide for common law duty of care doctors and Japan, Germany and other civil law countries doctors prescribed duty of care. Finally, these two legal obligations related to medical attention were compared, mainly from civil law countries, following doctor ’s duty of care by doctors and our focus on the duty of care to the analysis.Chapter Ⅴ, Our duty of care to improve the doctor suggested rules. Duty of care by doctors of the relevant provisions of domestic research, made unreasonable for the provision of a doctor’s duty of care gaps and supporting the legal system, and finally improve the relevant judicial interpretation from perfect Disclaimer case of emergency regulations and promotion of medical liability insurance system for the rules of the duty of care doctors made a perfect proposal.