我们是否应该将故意未获得适当知情同意的行为定为刑事犯罪?

Q2 Social Sciences
Clark Hobson, J. Miola
{"title":"我们是否应该将故意未获得适当知情同意的行为定为刑事犯罪?","authors":"Clark Hobson, J. Miola","doi":"10.1177/09685332211060265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper takes the form of a polemic and thought experiment. The starting point is that, if medical law’s claims to place autonomy at the heart of the enterprise are to be taken seriously, then autonomy either needs to be considered a recoverable harm, or the most egregious infringements should be subject to the criminal law. This might particularly be the case where a doctor deliberately attempts to modify the patient’s decision by failing to disclose information that they know that the patient would find significant. The article considers medical law’s relationship with autonomy, before applying the criminal law – in the form of the analogous situation of defendants who deliberately fail to disclose HIV+ status to their sexual partners. What we find is a distinct difference in the way that autonomy is seen by medical and criminal law, although both are equally unsatisfactory.","PeriodicalId":39602,"journal":{"name":"Medical Law International","volume":"21 1","pages":"369 - 392"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Should we criminalize a deliberate failure to obtain properly informed consent?\",\"authors\":\"Clark Hobson, J. Miola\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09685332211060265\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper takes the form of a polemic and thought experiment. The starting point is that, if medical law’s claims to place autonomy at the heart of the enterprise are to be taken seriously, then autonomy either needs to be considered a recoverable harm, or the most egregious infringements should be subject to the criminal law. This might particularly be the case where a doctor deliberately attempts to modify the patient’s decision by failing to disclose information that they know that the patient would find significant. The article considers medical law’s relationship with autonomy, before applying the criminal law – in the form of the analogous situation of defendants who deliberately fail to disclose HIV+ status to their sexual partners. What we find is a distinct difference in the way that autonomy is seen by medical and criminal law, although both are equally unsatisfactory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Law International\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"369 - 392\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Law International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09685332211060265\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Law International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09685332211060265","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文采用辩论和思想实验的形式。出发点是,如果要认真对待医疗法关于将自主权置于企业核心地位的主张,那么自主权要么需要被视为一种可恢复的损害,要么最严重的侵权行为应该受到刑法的制裁。这种情况尤其可能发生在医生故意试图改变病人的决定,不透露他们知道病人会觉得重要的信息。在适用刑法之前,该条考虑了医药法与自主权的关系——其形式类似于被告故意不向其性伴侣披露艾滋病毒阳性状况的情况。我们发现,医学法和刑法对自主权的看法存在明显差异,尽管两者都同样不能令人满意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Should we criminalize a deliberate failure to obtain properly informed consent?
This paper takes the form of a polemic and thought experiment. The starting point is that, if medical law’s claims to place autonomy at the heart of the enterprise are to be taken seriously, then autonomy either needs to be considered a recoverable harm, or the most egregious infringements should be subject to the criminal law. This might particularly be the case where a doctor deliberately attempts to modify the patient’s decision by failing to disclose information that they know that the patient would find significant. The article considers medical law’s relationship with autonomy, before applying the criminal law – in the form of the analogous situation of defendants who deliberately fail to disclose HIV+ status to their sexual partners. What we find is a distinct difference in the way that autonomy is seen by medical and criminal law, although both are equally unsatisfactory.
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
Medical Law International
Medical Law International Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The scope includes: Clinical Negligence. Health Matters Affecting Civil Liberties. Forensic Medicine. Determination of Death. Organ and Tissue Transplantation. End of Life Decisions. Legal and Ethical Issues in Medical Treatment. Confidentiality. Access to Medical Records. Medical Complaints Procedures. Professional Discipline. Employment Law and Legal Issues within NHS. Resource Allocation in Health Care. Mental Health Law. Misuse of Drugs. Legal and Ethical Issues concerning Human Reproduction. Therapeutic Products. Medical Research. Cloning. Gene Therapy. Genetic Testing and Screening. And Related Topics.
×
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