• Management & Information Systems Review
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.35-57
• /
• 2014

Relationship marketing has been dealt with as an effective strategy for customer loyalty in prior research. It seems to be essential that organizations should make efforts to develop successful relationship between the organizations and the customers. However, a customers' voluntary efforts are also needed to strengthen the relationship meaningfully. Relationships are built on the foundations of mutuality. In other words, customers' efforts are necessary for relationship development, as well as an organization's efforts. Hereby, the role of customers for the development of a relationship with an organization has been overlooked in previous research so far. This study applied the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to explain the role of customer motivation in developing customer relationship. Thus, the author chose customers who have experienced medical service recently as survey participants. Then, this paper verified the path relationships between self-determination factors (autonomy, perceived competence, relatedness) and relational factors(shared responsibility, commitment, relationship retention). It suggested that role of customers is inevitable in developing the relationship. In conclusion, this research has several implications on relationship marketing. For service providers, they should understand that the customer's perceived self-determination can improve tangible and intangible performance in relationship development.

• Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care
• /
• v.19 no.4
• /
• pp.292-295
• /
• 2016

Hospice and palliative care in Taiwan has been growing continuously. The 2015 Quality of Death index, as rated by the Economist Intelligence Unit, ranked Taiwan first among Asian countries and sixth in the world. In this review article, we highlight three particular areas that might have contributed to this success; the laws and regulations, spiritual care and research network. Finally, we discuss the future challenges and prospects for Taiwanese encounters. A systemic review was conducted with the keywords "hospice palliative care Taiwan" using PubMed. The passing of the "Natural Death Act" in 2000 set the example and established a landmark for patient autonomy in Asia; it guarantees the patient's right to request that medical staff do not resuscitate (DNR) them and to reject other futile medical treatments at the end of their life, thus reflecting the importance of palliative care from the policy perspective. In 2015, Taiwan passed another pioneering law entitled the "Patient Autonomy Act". This law states that a patient may decline medical treatment according to his/her own will. Taiwanese indigenous spiritual care was launched in 2000. It requires a Buddhist Chaplain to successfully complete a training program consisting of lectures, as well as bedside practicum before applying Buddhist practices to end-of-life care. The Japan-Korea-Taiwan research network was established for the purpose of enabling collaborative research for the East-Asian collaborative cross-cultural Study to Elucidate the Dying process (EASED) cohort. With consensus from the government and society to make it a priority, hospice and palliative medicine in Taiwan has been growing steadily.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.37-63
• /
• 2023

In medical litigation, there are various cases where a doctor's 'explanation' of a patient becomes problematic. Medical explanations and guidance are required from the doctor, starting from the beginning of diagnosis, through treatment processes such as surgery, when hospitalization is necessary for treatment, during hospitalization, upon discharge, and after discharge. Furthermore, notification from the doctor or medical institution may be requested regarding the economic costs that will be incurred due to medical treatment. South Korea's judiciary has been developing legal principles regarding such doctor's explanations by distinguishing between explanations for obtaining consent for medical treatment and medical explanations related to guidance on patient treatment methods, taking into account related laws such as the stage of treatment and the Medical Service Act. Additionally, the Constitutional Court recently ruled on the non-benefit cost notification system linked to the explanation of economic costs. However, holding a doctor accountable solely because the doctor's explanation was insufficient has aspects that do not correspond to the actual situation in clinical reality, and may have a reflexive disadvantage that results in a decline in legal rights. Therefore, the doctor's explanation needs to be examined from both perspectives: guaranteeing the patient's right to self-determination and protecting his or her right to decision.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.79-117
• /
• 2023

Among the healthcare-related judgments handed down in 2002, there was a significant ruling on the timing of the duty of explanation, stating that, in order to ensure the exercise of the patient's right to self-determination, the patient must be given time to consider and decide on the risks and side effects of a medical procedure in specific circumstances. In addition, in a case where an insurance company claimed unjust enrichment against a medical institution on behalf of its insureds, the court provided a clear standard by distinguishing between active and passive requirements regarding the need to preserve the right of subrogation of creditors. In the area of medical administration, there was a ruling that clarified that a medical institution's business suspension under the National Health Insurance Act is directed against the medical institution, a ruling that broadly recognized causation in a case of compensation for side effects of corona vaccination, and a ruling on the scope of a medical practitioner's license, such as the use of ultrasound devices by an oriental medicine practitioner. In a case involving a patient's claim for eviction from a medical institution, the court reviewed a ruling on just cause for termination of a hospitalization contract in relation to Article 15(1) of the Medical law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.155-190
• /
• 2015

The court sentenced meaningful decisions related to the medical service in 2014. The court assumed the negligence of medical staff in the accident if being broken while using the medical equipment for not an original purpose at the time of surgery and ruled that the compensation for damage can be recognized in recognition of the causal relationship between the explanation duty violation and side effect's happening when unproven surgery on safety is implemented regarding the duty of explanation, that in the case of cosmetic surgery, the subject on the duty of explanation needs to be expanded compared to the general medical practice and that the duty of explanation cannot be accepted for the range that cannot be expectable. Also, the court has provided the requirement and limitation of self-determination exercise in case of the crash between patient's self-determination and doctor's duty of care and has ruled that as automobile insurance contract is a contract with the insurance company to pay regarding liability for car accidents, treating patients and taking the insurance money is not illegal activity even for the unlicensed hospital violating the medical law while established. The judgment stating the opinion that medical practitioners cannot be punished according to the medical law prohibiting the receiving of rebate in case that medical practitioners did not receive benefit while the medical institution itself gained an unfair economic benefit also stands out. And the court has ruled that even if the medical institution who received a business suspension is closed, the suspension is still effective in case that the same operator opens a new medical institution in the same place, ruled on the requirement to conduct a medical service outside of the medical institution that the doctor opened and ruled that the administrative penalty cannot be conducted prior to the conviction on charge of violating the medical law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.83-139
• /
• 2019

Recognition of liability for damages due to medical malpractice has been developed largely on the basis of two paths. First is the case where there is an error in a physician's medical practice and this infringes upon the legal interests of life and body, and the compensation for monetary and non-monetary damages incurred from such infringement on life and body becomes an issue. Second is the case where there is a breach of a physician's duty of explanation that results in a infringement on the patient's right of autonomous decision, and the compensation for non-monetary damages incurred from such infringement becomes an issue. However, even if there is a medical error, since it is difficult to prove the causation between the medical error of a physician and the infringement upon legal interests, the physician's responsibility for damage compensation is denied in some cases. Consider, for example, a case where a patient is already in the final stage of cancer and has a very low possibility of a complete recovery even if proper treatment is received from the physician. Here, it is not appropriate to refuse recognition of any damage compensation based on the reason that the possibility of the patient dying is very high even in the absence of a medical error. This is so because, at minimum, non-monetary damage such as psychological suffering is incurred due to the physician's medical error. In such a case, our courts recognize on an exceptional basis consolation money compensation for losing the chance to receive proper treatment. However, since the theoretical system has not been established in minutiae, what comes under the benefit and protection of the law is not clearly explicated. The recent discourse on compensating for damages incurred by patients, even when the causation between the physician's medical error and infringement upon the legal interests of life and body is denied, by establishing a new legal interest is based on the "legal principle of loss of opportunity for treatment." On what should be the substance of the new legal interest, treatment possibility argument, expectation infringement argument, considerable degree of survival possibility infringement argument and loss of opportunity for treatment argument are being put forth. It is reasonable to see the substance of this protected legal interest as "the benefit of receiving treatment appropriate to the medical standard" according to the loss of opportunity for treatment argument. The above benefit to the patient is a value inherent to human dignity that should not be infringed upon or obstructed by anyone, and at the same time, it is a basic desire regarding life and a benefit worthy of protection by law. In this regard, "the benefit of receiving treatment appropriate to the medical standard" can be made concrete as one of the general personal rights related to psychological legal interest.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.67-96
• /
• 2022

"Aid in Dying" means that when a decision-making patient suffers from an incurable disease, a drug that can speed up death is prescribed by a doctor and used to lead to death. Since the suspension of life-sustaining treatment was institutionalized based on human dignity and patient autonomy, the question of whether assisted death can be legally justified in relation to the right to receive medical help to shorten one's life to die with dignity has recently been actively discussed. In Korea, since the suspension of life-sustaining treatment was institutionalized by the enactment of the Life-sustaining Treatment Decision Act in 2016, an amendment to the Life-sustaining Treatment Act was recently proposed to legalize Aid in Dying. The global trend is that human "Right to Die" is discussed in the division of life and death, from the suspension of life-sustaining treatment to assisted death, and again in the order of euthanasia. In this paper, we started discussing dignified death and institutionalized patients' right to self-determination, looked at the controversy in the United States, which legislated assisted death in many states since the 2000s, and analyzed the main contents of California's End of Life Option Act and the data after enforcement. The strict requirements for Aid in Dying, such as voluntary confirmation of patients' intentions and doctors' obligation to provide information, and the results of California's Aid in dying system, composed of relatively diverse races, were reviewed.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.285-308
• /
• 2012

The Korean supreme court said that Mrs Kim who was in a persistent vegetative state had a right to die if she had a presumed will or assumption of dying against Severance hospital in 2009. Presumed would be vague and can not be subjective to conjecture though, the court had a developed trial on the case. I recommend the higher valued notion such as the 'right to decide on the life extension' is more logical than assumptive will. To achieve this recommendation, I will search right to life, right to decision, human dignity and find the good relationship between them. In conclusion, I will announce that if PVS patients without advanced directives aren't able to express their will and no one could not assume their right to die in spite of meaningless life extension. So only the due and strict procedure about the extinction of meaningless PVS patients will allow them to sacrifice themselves or remove life extension ventilators. Also active euthanasia would be possible under the strict procedure of making advanced directives and the act of helping active euthanasia additionally, the crime of abetting suicide would not be executed in the legal scope.

• Journal of the Korea Convergence Society
• /
• v.10 no.11
• /
• pp.543-555
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this study was to define and clarify the concept of Shared decision-making (SDM) in patients with chronic disease. Walker and Avant's concept analysis process was used to analyze interdisciplinary convergence in SDM. SDM in patients with chronic disease can be defined by the following attributes: acknowledgment patients as 'self-care experts', the rights of self-determination, reversible negotiation, and patient-centered care. The antecedents of SMD consisted of situations where there is a need to make a decision from several treatment options of similar efficacy, decisional conflict, patient, family, and health provider's willingness to participate in the decision-making process, enough time and opportunity for SDM. The consequences occurring as a result of SMD were decrease decisional conflict, improvement health outcome, satisfaction, quality of life, enhancement self-management and self-efficacy with long-term, and living acceptably with the illness. Based on these results, a scale measuring SDM in patients with chronic disease is needed.

• Development and Reproduction
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.143-154
• /
• 2010

This article analyzes two leading Korean cases which led to opposite conclusions: the Boramae Hospital Case (Korean Supreme Court 2002 Do 995) and the Shinchon Severance Hospital Case (Korean Supreme Court 2009 Da 17471). In doing so, it pays particular attention to the acceptance, modification, and rejection of paternalism, specifically 'physician paternalism' and 'familial paternalism', both of which have long and strongly influenced the Korean medical environment. In Boramae Hospital, the Court emphasized the obligation of the physician in terms of the life of the patient (eg: protecting and preserving the life and welfare of the patient). Its position seemed to be based on the traditional physician paternalism which presupposes the ability of physicians to identify right and wrong choices according to natural laws. However, the Court saw itself as the final arbiter of who identifies and determines the real world content and consequences of that natural law. In short, the Court elevated itself to the supreme guardian of the patient, and held that its decision cannot be overruled by that of the patient's family. So without specifically referring to the importance of the family and the role of familial decisions, both long-observed traditions in medical decision-making in Korea, the Court shifted away from familial paternalism. In Shinchon Severance Hospital, the Court explained the meaning of the patient's powers of self-rulemore concretely, explaining its scope and substance in greater detail. The Court held that one can exercise the right of self-rule, even over issues such as death, in the form of 'previous medical directions'. However, this case does not represent a wholesale acceptance of medical autonomy (ie: it does not accept self-rule unconditionally). Rather, the Court accepted the importance of the opinions and decision of physicians and of the Hospital Ethics Commission, and the Court still retained to itself the authority to review and make alterations to 'material' decision. The Court did not overlook the importance of the decision of the patient's family, but it also did not relinquish its status as supreme guardian, emphasizing the 'objective' nature of a decision from the court.