在医疗保健环境中,风险增加作为风险产生的补充标准,不允许对遗漏的因果关系进行分析

Q4 Social Sciences
Renzo Munita-Marambio
{"title":"在医疗保健环境中,风险增加作为风险产生的补充标准,不允许对遗漏的因果关系进行分析","authors":"Renzo Munita-Marambio","doi":"10.4067/s0718-80722022000100225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper, focused on medical liability, is intended to analyze how causation by omissions works. We affirm that the fault, in terms of creating a not allowed risk, is identified with the normative approach. Notwithstanding the foregoing, said intellectual projection of guilt and, consequently, of cau sation by omissions context, is possible to be answered through other approaches. In this sense, it is proposed to address the objective imputation criterion called increased risk (also known as lawful alternative conduct). It is considered that the aforementioned concept is useful in contexts in which the guilty omission cannot be considered as the cause of the damage, since if the behavior under question had not been omitted, the tort would have taken place anyway. Hence, the creation of impermissible risks can be taken as a presumption of causation in law susceptible to defensible contradictory reasoning. KEywords: causation; omissions; unauthorized risk; increasing risk; fault","PeriodicalId":36265,"journal":{"name":"Revista Chilena de Derecho Privado","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EL INCREMENTO DEL RIESGO COMO CRITERIO COMPLEMENTARIO A LA CREACIÓN DEL RIESGO NO PERMITIDO EN EL ANÁLISIS DE LA CAUSALIDAD EN LAS OMISIONES EN CONTEXTOS MÉDICO-SANITARIOS\",\"authors\":\"Renzo Munita-Marambio\",\"doi\":\"10.4067/s0718-80722022000100225\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper, focused on medical liability, is intended to analyze how causation by omissions works. We affirm that the fault, in terms of creating a not allowed risk, is identified with the normative approach. Notwithstanding the foregoing, said intellectual projection of guilt and, consequently, of cau sation by omissions context, is possible to be answered through other approaches. In this sense, it is proposed to address the objective imputation criterion called increased risk (also known as lawful alternative conduct). It is considered that the aforementioned concept is useful in contexts in which the guilty omission cannot be considered as the cause of the damage, since if the behavior under question had not been omitted, the tort would have taken place anyway. Hence, the creation of impermissible risks can be taken as a presumption of causation in law susceptible to defensible contradictory reasoning. KEywords: causation; omissions; unauthorized risk; increasing risk; fault\",\"PeriodicalId\":36265,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Chilena de Derecho Privado\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Chilena de Derecho Privado\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-80722022000100225\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Chilena de Derecho Privado","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-80722022000100225","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文以医疗责任为中心,旨在分析不作为因果关系是如何起作用的。我们确认,就产生不允许的风险而言,错误是用规范方法确定的。尽管有前文所述,所述的内疚感的智力投射,以及由此产生的由疏忽引起的因果关系,可以通过其他方法来回答。在这个意义上,建议解决称为风险增加的客观归责标准(也称为合法替代行为)。在过失行为不能被视为损害原因的情况下,上述概念被认为是有用的,因为如果所讨论的行为没有被忽略,侵权行为无论如何都会发生。因此,不允许的风险的产生可以被视为法律上的因果推定,容易受到可辩护的矛盾推理的影响。关键词:因果关系;遗漏;未经授权的风险;增加风险;的错
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
EL INCREMENTO DEL RIESGO COMO CRITERIO COMPLEMENTARIO A LA CREACIÓN DEL RIESGO NO PERMITIDO EN EL ANÁLISIS DE LA CAUSALIDAD EN LAS OMISIONES EN CONTEXTOS MÉDICO-SANITARIOS
This paper, focused on medical liability, is intended to analyze how causation by omissions works. We affirm that the fault, in terms of creating a not allowed risk, is identified with the normative approach. Notwithstanding the foregoing, said intellectual projection of guilt and, consequently, of cau sation by omissions context, is possible to be answered through other approaches. In this sense, it is proposed to address the objective imputation criterion called increased risk (also known as lawful alternative conduct). It is considered that the aforementioned concept is useful in contexts in which the guilty omission cannot be considered as the cause of the damage, since if the behavior under question had not been omitted, the tort would have taken place anyway. Hence, the creation of impermissible risks can be taken as a presumption of causation in law susceptible to defensible contradictory reasoning. KEywords: causation; omissions; unauthorized risk; increasing risk; fault
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信