diplomsko delo
Jasna Fišer (Author), Nataša Samec (Mentor)

Abstract

Pojasnilna dolžnost je dolžnost zdravnika, da pacienta seznani z diagnozo, z možnimi načini zdravljenja in rehabilitacijo, z nevarnostmi, ki so povezane s posameznimi posegi, in tudi s posledicami, do katerih lahko pride, če bo medicinsko pomoč odklonil. Privolitev je relevantna samo, če je bila volja pacienta izoblikovana na podlagi pogovora z zdravnikom, ki je pacientu temeljito pojasnil celoten položaj. Šele, ko zdravnik svojo obveznost ustrezno izpolni, je mogoče privolitvi pacienta dati pravi pomen, saj le obveščenost zagotavlja možnost odločanja. V Republiki Sloveniji je pojasnilna dolžnost ustavno in zakonsko urejena, pomembna pa so tudi normativno zapisana etična priporočila. Pri nas je najpomembnejši Zakon o pacientovih pravicah, ki med drugim določa tudi posamezne vrste pojasnil, in sicer pojasnilo tveganja, terapevtsko pojasnilo in pojasnilo diagnoze. Potrebno pa je omeniti tudi nepravo pojasnilo, ki ga predstavljata terapevtsko pojasnilo in pojasnilo o finančnih posledicah posega. Na splošno mora biti pojasnilo takšno, da omogoči pacientu razumeti bistvo, pomen in razsežnost zdravljenja ter njegove prednosti in slabosti. Načeloma zadostuje, da je zdravnikovo pojasnilo dano pacientu ustno, kot dopolnitev ustnega razgovora pa se uporabljajo različni obrazci v obliki pojasnitvenega kataloga. Pacient ima pravico do pojasnila, vendar se lahko tej pravici tudi odpove, v določenih primerih pa je dopustno pojasnilno dolžnost omejiti zaradi varovanja pacientovih koristi – gre za tako imenovani zdravnikov terapevtski privilegij. V primeru kršitve pojasnilne dolžnosti gre za civilni delikt, ki ima ob izpolnjenih predpostavkah za posledico odškodninsko odgovornost. Te predpostavke so: nedopustno ravnanje zdravnika (nedopustno škodljivo dejstvo), nedopustna škoda, vzročna zveza in odgovornost. V našem pravnem sistemu je v zdravstvu uveljavljena subjektivna odškodninska odgovornost, vendar se pojavljajo tendence k vzpostavitvi objektivne odgovornosti.

Keywords

pojasnilna dolžnost;pacient;zdravnik;odgovornost;odškodnina;medicinska etika;terapevtski privilegij;diplomska dela;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Source: Maribor
Typology: 2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization: UM PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher: [J. Fišer]
UDC: 614:17(043.2)
COBISS: 4450347 Link will open in a new window
Views: 4336
Downloads: 809
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary title: CIVIL RESPONSIBILITY FOR BREACHING THE INFORMED CONSENT OF THE DOCTOR
Secondary abstract: Informed consent is the duty of a physician to inform her patient of the diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation plan, the risks of procedures and adverse outcomes that might result from denying treatment. The consent is relevant only when the patient's will has been shaped as a result of a thorough discussion with her doctor. Only after the physician has adequatelly fulfilled her duty is it possible to properly value the patient's consent, for it is the informed aspect that gives the patient the power of true agency. In the Republic of Slovenia the institute of informed consent is guranteed by the constitution and the laws, with normative ethical recommendations playing an important role as well. The most important law in the country is the Patient's rights law, which determines the various aspects of informed consent: the explanation of risk, therapy and diagnosis. It is necessary to illuminate the statute of non-full explanations of explanation of risk and the financial outcomes of the therapeutic intervention. In general, the explanation must enable the patient to grasp the essence, meaning and extent of the treatment and its benefits and risks. It is usually sufficient to relay the explanation orally, with various forms serving as additional tools in the explanation catalogue. The patient has a right to the explanation, but can void her right, and in certain circumstances it is also necessarily to curtail this right for the patient's benefit - the so called doctor's therapeutic privilege. The violation of the duty of informed consent is a civil delict that requires payment of damages when certain assumptions are met. The assumptions are: inexusable physician behavior (inexusable harmful fact), inexusable damage, a causal relation and responsibility. In the slovene legal system the current practice is a subjective responsibility for damages, but there are tendencies to move towards an objective responsibility.
Secondary keywords: Informed consent;patient;physician;responsibility;compensation;medical ethics;therapeutic privilege.;
URN: URN:SI:UM:
Type (COBISS): Undergraduate thesis
Thesis comment: Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fak.
Pages: 84 f.
Keywords (UDC): applied sciences;medicine;technology;uporabne znanosti;medicina;tehnika;medical sciences;medicina;public health and hygiene;accident prevention;javno zdravje in higiena;preprečitev nesreč;philosophy;psychology;filozofija;psihologija;moral philosophy;ethics;practical philosophy;moralna filozofija;etika;praktična filozofija;
ID: 999270