To the issue of legal liability for informational and mental iatrogenesis and their correlation

N. Ognerubov
{"title":"To the issue of legal liability for informational and mental iatrogenesis and their correlation","authors":"N. Ognerubov","doi":"10.20310/2587-9340-2019-3-10-165-174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We consider various approaches to understanding and classifying such phenomenon as “iatrogenesis”. Taking into account the specifics of the stated theme, we highlight informational and mental manifestations of iatrogenesis, we identify approaches where these types differ, as well as approaches where they are identical. Due to this, we analyze informational and mental iatrogenesis from the juridical science point of view. We define the reasons for the criminal liability of a medical worker for “classical” mental iatrogenesis as highly controversial. At the same time there is a civil liability, namely, the issue of causing moral harm. In the context of the consideration of informational iatrogenesis, we propose to pay attention to the provisions of Article 137 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Article 732 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the provisions of criminal legislation on offenses to which medical workers may be subject, and the provisions of civil legislation on redress for the non-pecuniary damage as a civil liability. The conducted research led to the conclusion that it is impossible to identify informational and mental iatrogenesis from a legal point of view. We substantiate the necessity of conducting work at the legislative level on a clear classification of iatrogenesis as a basis for further research on its individual differentiations, which have legal significance both in doctrinal and practical terms.","PeriodicalId":183203,"journal":{"name":"Current Issues of the State and Law","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Issues of the State and Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20310/2587-9340-2019-3-10-165-174","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We consider various approaches to understanding and classifying such phenomenon as “iatrogenesis”. Taking into account the specifics of the stated theme, we highlight informational and mental manifestations of iatrogenesis, we identify approaches where these types differ, as well as approaches where they are identical. Due to this, we analyze informational and mental iatrogenesis from the juridical science point of view. We define the reasons for the criminal liability of a medical worker for “classical” mental iatrogenesis as highly controversial. At the same time there is a civil liability, namely, the issue of causing moral harm. In the context of the consideration of informational iatrogenesis, we propose to pay attention to the provisions of Article 137 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Article 732 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the provisions of criminal legislation on offenses to which medical workers may be subject, and the provisions of civil legislation on redress for the non-pecuniary damage as a civil liability. The conducted research led to the conclusion that it is impossible to identify informational and mental iatrogenesis from a legal point of view. We substantiate the necessity of conducting work at the legislative level on a clear classification of iatrogenesis as a basis for further research on its individual differentiations, which have legal significance both in doctrinal and practical terms.
信息致病与精神致病的法律责任问题及其相关性
我们考虑了各种方法来理解和分类这种现象为“医源性”。考虑到所述主题的具体情况,我们强调了医源性的信息和精神表现,我们确定了这些类型不同的方法,以及它们相同的方法。为此,本文从法学的角度对信息致病和精神致病进行分析。我们将医务工作者因“经典”精神疾病发生而承担刑事责任的原因定义为极具争议的。同时还有一个民事责任问题,即造成道德损害的问题。在考虑信息医源性的背景下,我们建议注意《俄罗斯联邦刑法》第137条和《俄罗斯联邦民法典》第732条的规定,以及刑事立法中关于医务工作者可能遭受的犯罪的规定,以及民事立法中关于作为民事责任的非金钱损害赔偿的规定。所进行的研究得出的结论是,不可能从法律的角度确定信息和精神的医源性。明确医源性分类的立法必要性,为进一步研究医源性的个体区分奠定基础,具有理论和实践意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信