Study On The Legal Issues Of Medical Responsibility Verification Institutions In China

Currently, with the situation in the two-track system of medical liability accreditation bodies, various medical institutions have identified responsibility for resolving medical disputes and service. However, due to the limits of the two accreditation bodies in the establishment, duties, governance structure, the existence of vague, contradictory expert opinions lead to problems plaguing dispute resolution and expert opinion of the authority and effectiveness. For these problems from the analysis of the current dual system of accreditation bodies and its problems, extraterritorial identification system development to proceed, raised the need to improve the medical liability accreditation bodies envisaged that the establishment of a unified medical liability unified accreditation bodies. For the scientific and standardized, unified management, in the establishment of accreditation bodies, the establishment of a medical liability accreditation bodies, change the monorail track, which requires identification with qualified personnel; in the specification of accreditation bodies procedures should be standardized identification start the program, open the identification process; the perfect identification of institutional responsibilities, the implementation expert for cross-regional, to avoid the "peer appraisal" of the suspect, unified draw lots to appoint an expert to participate in the identification, and standardize the identification of startup programs; internal governance structure of accreditation bodies strengthen the experts and expert opinion of ex post facto review, strengthen independent management, to get rid of administrative intervention agencies to implement internal governance individual responsibility. So as to establish a scientific and rational medical liability accreditation bodies, which also can resolve the current dispute, there are many contradictions.