• The Journal of Korean Medicine
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.66-80
• /
• 2020

Objectives: We investigated the current status of the consent form for bee-venom pharmacopuncture therapy, which is using in Korean medicine hospitals. We suggest the development of a standard informed consent form. Method: Through the questionnaire survey, status of using informed consent form was identified at 24 Korean medicine hospitals. We analyze different types of informed consent form, which was developed by each hospitals. We investigated the types of informed consent forms for various medical procedures through electronic searches. A standard informed consent form for bee-venom pharmacopuncture therapy was developed based on the medical law and the standard informed consent form for medical procedures developed by Korea Fair Trade Mediation Agency. Result: In our survey, 65% of the hospitals do not use consent well, only 35% of the hospitals use informed consent form, and the most hospitals use self-developed informed consent form. As a result of analyzing the contents of informed consent form used in each hospitals, the explanation of diagnosis, treatment precautions, suggestions for other treatments, consequences of not performing the scheduled procedure, possibility of treatment change was insufficient. 48% of hospitals manage consent in recording on a chart, 39% in scanned documents, and 13% in digital electronic consent form. Conclusion: A standard informed consent form for Bee-venom pharmacopuncture therapy include diagnosis, effectivness, necessity, indications, method, skin reaction test, hypersensitivity questionnaire, treatment precautions, possible hypersensitivity reactions and countermeasures, suggestions for other treatments, consequences of not performing the scheduled procedure, possibility of treatment change and the name of doctor.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2017

The Supreme Court of Korea first admitted compensation for damages caused by breach of informed consent in 1979. From then on, specific details of informed consent are shaping up and developing through court precedents. The duty of informed consent of doctor is based on article 10 of the Constitution and medical contract, and is expressly prescribed Article 12 of Framework Act on Health and Medical Services and other acts and regulations. By the way, the regulations about duty of informed consent of doctor have been established in Medical Law revised on December 20, 2016, and the revised Medical Law will be implemented on June 21, 2017. According to the revised Medical Law, medical practices subject to description and consent are operation, blood transfusion and general anesthesia that threaten to cause serious harm to human life or to the body. When performing these medical activities, the written consent must be explained and agreed upon in advance. If a doctor violates the law, he will incur fines of less than 3 million won. Comparing and viewing the revised Medical Law and existing legal principles about the duty of informed consent, we can confirm that there is a substantial difference between the two parties. Accordingly, despite the implementation of the revised medical law, the existing legal principles are unlikely to be affected. However, from the perspective of legal uniformity and stability, it is undesirable that legal judgments on the same issues differ from each other. The revised Medical Law about informed consent needs to be reformed according to existing legal principles. And, as in the case of Germany, it is desirable to include the matters concerning informed consent in the civil code.

• Korean Parent-Child Health Journal
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.18-30
• /
• 2003

Congenital heart disease is the most frequently shown congenital disease among children, most of them can be corrected with operation. However, Patients and their parents need nursing intervention when they face this risky incident of operation. Therefore, parents' experiences are absolutely needed to plan nursing intervention to give practical help to the patients and their parents. The purpose of this study is to provide basic resources to develop a feasible intervention program for the parents by understanding the experiences related to the informed consent of cardiac surgery of their child. From January to June 2003, 10 parents of children patients with congenital heart disease were interviewed who filled out Operation Agreement before the primary operation after they are diagnosed as congenital heart disease in pediatric chest surgery of A hospital in Seoul. They were asked to give opinion regarding pre-operation needs and the interviewed information was analyzed. The results of this study are as follows : Firstly, they were asked what they felt before they were told about the operation of their children from the doctor before filling out the informed consent of operation. They felt 1) vague, 2) confusion of choose, 3) risky, 4) resented, 5) uneasy, 6) guilty, and 7) the burden of operation. Secondly, they were asked what they felt after they filled out the informed consent of operation and the doctor gave them detailed information on the operation of their children. They felt 1) confused, 2) responsible, 3) rejected, 4) angry, 5) plain, 6) to have hope, 7) trying to trust medical people, 8) that consolation is needed, and 9) conditional reduction of the burden of operation. Thirdly, followings are the categories of congenital parents' demand before operation based on the analysis of experiences related to the preparation of the informed consent of operation. 1) Information Demand (1) Anticipatory information (2) Concrete and precise information (3) Individual information 2) Support (1) Empathy (2) Parental supporting (3) Support of parents in the same situation 3) Education and consulting (1) Children-oriented Education (2) Consultation Considering the results of this study, parents of the child with congenital heart disease seem to have various emotional experiences related to filling out the informed consent and they need concrete and practical helps before cardiac surgery. This study proposes that systematic nursing intervention is needed according to the needs of the parents who have the child with congenital heart disease before operation in the field of child health nursing.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2015

Recently, Practicing of ghost surgery and duty of informed consent of doctors have become a big issue in the medical dispute and lawsuits. The ground of admitting the informed consent and the agreement(self-determination of patients) can be based on the dignity of man and the right to pursue his happiness guaranteed under Article 10 of the constitution in theory. However there are no explicit legal regulations on the duty of the informed consent and there is no substantive legal enactment on the informed consent, but there is a collision between self-determination of patients and the discretionary power of doctors. If the discretionary power on the duty of the informed consent was extended it may result in the infringement of the right of surgical patients, so called arbitrary medical treatment. Relating to this issue, New Jersey Supreme Court held that a patient has the right to determine not only whether surgery is to be performed on him, but also who shall perform it. Moreover it held that a surgeon who operates without the patient's consent engages in the unauthorized touching of another and, thus, commits a battery'. But there are no ghost surgery cases adopting battery theory in Korea, and professional negligence has been considered rather than the battery, regarding an absence of hostile intent to injure patient. Supreme Court of Korea held that a doctor who operates a medical procedure without the patient's valid prior consent based on wrong diagnosis commits professional negligence resulting in injury, and the patient's invalid consent do not preclude wrongfulness'. However, if a health care provider conducts a completely non-consensual treatment or substitute surgeon without consent, the action should be plead in battery, not negligence, but if a health care provider violate his duty of care in obtaining the consent of the patient by failing to disclosure all relevant information (risks) that a reasonable person would deem significant in making a decision to have the procedure, the action should be plead in negligence, not battery. Therefore, the scope of patients' self-determination can be protected by stating clearly the scope of the duty of the informed consent and the exemption of the informed consent legislatively, it is considered that it is valid to legislate the limitation of the discretionary power.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.11-36
• /
• 2009

This thesis introduces the trends of korean courts' ruling on damages in medical malpractice cases for past 10 years. First of all, Korean courts' ruling have had a tendency to pay only non-economic damages for not taking the informed consent. If a doctor cannot get the informed consent from a patient, he compensate only non-economic damages for the infringement of self-determination rights of patient. It's enough for the plaintiff to prove the infringement of self-determination rights, if the plaintiff just want to get non-economic damages. The Korean Supreme court have ruled that if plaintiffs want to get economic damages for the infringement of self-determination rights or informed consent, plaintiffs must prove that the infringement of self-determination rights is the proximate cause of the economic damages of patient. There is another tendency for the Korean Supreme court to limit the damages in medical malpractice cases on the ground of patient's diseases' dangerousness or patient's idiosyncrasy. In the past courts often limit the damages only to 70~80% of total damages, but now a days courts mostly limit the damages to 20~30%. This thesis also introduce the Korean courts' trends about Valuing damages in personal injury actions awarded for gratuitously rendered nursing and medical care.

• Journal of The Korean Society of Clinical Toxicology
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.1-10
• /
• 2005

Gastric lavage is now known to be ineffective, unnecessary or hazardous in some circumstances where it used to be performed as a routine. This article concerns the medico-legal aspect of forced gastric lavage. The Supreme Court 2005.1.28, 2003da14119 is the case where a patient, who ingested the organophosphate insecticide to attempt suicide and refused lavage. At first we discuss the effectiveness or hazards of lavage because a very high degree of proof -of negligence, not error of clinical judgment - would be required. Lavage, with or without the informed consent, performed negligently which result in harm could, of course, give rise to a claim in negligence. A doctor might also be held negligent in failing to perform an act which he/she had a duty to perform.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.397-445
• /
• 2010

This thesis introduces the trends of korean courts' ruling on damages in medical malpractice cases for past 10 years. First of all, Korean courts' ruling have had a tendency to pay only non-economic damages for not taking the informed consent. If a doctor cannot get the informed consent from a patient, he compensate only non-economic damages for the infringement of self-determination rights of patient. It's enough for the plaintiff to prove the infringement of self-determination rights, if the plaintiff just want to get non-economic damages. The Korean Supreme court have ruled that if plaintiffs want to get economic damages for the infringement of self-determination rights or informed consent, plaintiffs must prove that the infringement of self-determination rights is the proximate cause of the economic damages of patient. There is another tendency for the Korean Supreme court to limit the damages in medical malpractice cases on the ground of patient's diseases' dangerousness or patient's idiosyncrasy. In the past courts often limit the damages only to 70~80% of total damages, but now a days courts mostly limit the damages to 20~30%. This thesis also introduce the Korean courts' trends about Valuing damages in personal injury actions awarded for gratuitously rendered nursing and medical care.

• Journal of Korean Clinical Nursing Research
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.73-84
• /
• 2010

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the ethical awareness and attitude of patients' families towards Do-Not-Resuscitate(DNR), and thus provide basic information required to develop Korean appropriate DNR instructions and practice informed consent for DNR. Methods: During April 2010, 219 patient family members visiting the hospital were surveyed using a questionnaire. Results: Most of the participants preferred DNR to meaningless treatment for incurable patients. They recognized the necessity of explaining DNR to the patient with a terminal disease. They also requested DNR orders for themselves if they were in the same medical condition. In making a DNR decision, the patient's family agreed and preferred that it reflect the opinion of the patient and the doctor in charge. They also agreed that treatment should be given with the best efforts even if a DNR decision had been made for the patient. Conclusion: To make a decision on DNR for a patient who is terminally ill or for whom survival is not possible, a practice of informed consent and guidelines for executing the DNR reflecting the patient's opinion are required.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.389-420
• /
• 2009

Main Issue of Supreme Court Decision 2005Da16713 Delivered on June 24, 2005 is about the duty of medical care in the interhospital transfer of patients. According to the above Supreme Court Decision, in the interhospital transfer of patients, the decision to transfer should make from the aspect of medical treatment. The hospitals and doctors keep the duty of medical care. In addition to the duty for hospitals/doctors to check the capacity and availability of the hospital to which the patient is transferred, there are also duties to inform about emergency medical service and to sufficiently explain the need for the transfer, the medical conditions of the patient to be transferred and the hospital from which the patient is transferred. The hospital to which the patient is transferred must be thoroughly informed about matters such as the patient's conditions, the treatment the patient was given and reasons for transfer. including information upon referral, completeness of medical records, patient monitoring and so on. The interhospital transfer requires the consent of doctor belonging to the hospital to which the patient is transferred after the consideration of capacity and availability of the hospital and the informed consent of patients or legal representatives.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.217-260
• /
• 2013

In connection to the civil liability of the medical malpractice, plaintiff and courts are solving the medical disputes with theory of the liability based on tort law. because contract law does not enact the right of claim of solatium and a plaintiff's lawyer and courts hesitate to use contract law. Medical treatment of doctor is main debt in medical contract and its in-complete performance gives rise to the violations of human's life, body and health. Consequently a breach of medical contract leads to violations of person-al rights. These violations spring from liability of contract as well as tort and damages from them are recognized based on medical contract law. A duty of explanation of doctor is a independent and appendant debt to the treatment debt. However its breach provokes violations of human's life, body and health as well as a right self-determination. Therefore consolation money claim should be recognized. In case of the violation of patient's life, body and health, patient's family al-so can demand consolation money due to the violation of their's own mental pain. However in case of the violation of only patient's self-determination without informed concent, they can not demand it by reason of the violation of patient's self-determination. But by reason of the violation of patient's life, body and health that were recognized by proximate causal relation between violation of duty of explanation and abd execution, they can do.