Abstract:
The judicial appraisal of medical disputes and the technical appraisal of medical malpractice are the same evidence-based procedures for dealing with medical disputes. However, due to the different chronological backgrounds in which they were created, there are obvious differences in their legislative bases, directions of research, and standards of determination. One is to determine whether the medical results caused the patient's life and health damage causality, while the other is to study whether the medical behavior constitutes medical malpractice. The fundamental difference between the two lies in the fact that one is to use legal theory to study and analyze the medical results, and the other is to use medical theory to study and analyze the medical behavior. The difference between judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal has not only caused extensive controversy in the academic and judicial practice, but also had many adverse effects on the maintenance of normal medical order and the interests of doctors and patients. In the era of "dualistic" parallelism, serious study and exploration of the difference between the two and the solution to the correct application of the law, to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of doctors and patients has a profound practical and historical significance.
Keywords: judicial appraisal; medical malpractice appraisal; judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal; documentary evidence review opinion.
Body:
I. Background and Coexisting Confusion of Medical Malpractice Technical Appraisal and Judicial Appraisal of Medical Disputes
The predecessor of the Regulations on the Treatment of Medical Accidents is the Measures for the Treatment of Medical Accidents, which was promulgated by the State Council in 1987. The Measures were the regulatory basis for the administrative handling of medical disputes and civil adjudication from the 1980s to the beginning of the 21st century. Article 18 of the Measures stipulates that, if a medical incident is determined to be a medical incident, a one-time financial compensation may be awarded according to the grade of the incident, the circumstances and the patient's condition, and that administrative sanctions may be imposed on the medical personnel who have been involved in the medical incident. The economic remedy for those who are victimized by medical malpractice during this period is the principle of compensation.
As a result of the economic system reform and the improvement of citizens' legal awareness, people realize that the use of legal weapons to protect the interests of medical treatment, doctor-patient conflicts gradually highlighted as one of the social focus of the contradictions. 2002 the state council promulgated the "regulations on the treatment of medical accidents", followed by the ministry of health promulgated seven supporting documents, "regulations on the treatment of medical accidents" will be "medical malpractice treatment" of the principle of economic compensation, to upgrade to medical malpractice liability. upgraded it to medical malpractice liability. However, the compensation provisions in the regulations do not fully correspond to the compensation items, contents and standards of the General Principles of Civil Law, and the compensation stipulated in the Regulations on the Handling of Medical Accidents is only a low-limit compensation.
In 2005, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC) adopted the Decision on the Administration of Judicial Appraisal, which confirmed and standardized the legal status and appraisal categories of social judicial appraisal institutions. The forensic medicine category of appraisal was included in the daily work of judicial appraisal organizations. Since then, some of the appraisals involving medical disputes have shifted from medical associations to judicial appraisal organizations.
July 1, 2011 implementation of the "Tort Liability Law" will be a separate chapter of medical tort liability, focusing on the provisions of the patient in the diagnostic and treatment activities of infringement of medical institutions and their medical staff are at fault, the medical institutions shall bear the responsibility for compensation. This law breaks the concept of medical damage into the scope of medical malpractice. Whether or not constitute medical malpractice, medical behavior where there is fault, causing damage to the patient should be compensated. Because regardless of whether it constitutes an accident, as long as there is a medical fault, causing damage to the patient should be compensated for the concept of the formation of legal professionals **** knowledge. This *** knowledge further advances the medical dispute appraisal to the judicial appraisal process skewed trend. Medical malpractice appraisal has been met with a certain degree of cold treatment and criticism, medical malpractice appraisal gradually reduced, and even some medical malpractice appraisal organization work stagnation phenomenon. Disputes between patients try to find reasons not to participate in medical malpractice appraisal. Medical malpractice appraisal and judicial appraisal of the choice has become the parties, and even the trial organs of the problem.
After the implementation of the Tort Liability Law, the Regulations on the Handling of Medical Accidents, which should have been declared null and void, are still in operation. Due to the medical malpractice appraisal and medical dispute judicial appraisal at the same time in parallel, the evidence-based medical dispute cases encountered a dilemma, some people call this phenomenon as "dualization". When dealing with medical disputes, some courts use judicial appraisal and some use medical malpractice appraisal. Some use medical malpractice appraisal first, and then use the judicial appraisal, and some use the judicial appraisal first, and then use the medical malpractice appraisal, the disability assessment is based on the medical malpractice "counterpart standard", and some directly use the employee injury assessment standard. Different identification associated with different compensation standards and content, this gap indirectly complicates the doctor-patient conflict.
Judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal coexist, not only a waste of social appraisal resources but also disturbed the parties to the choice and the use of judicial personnel. From the legal status analysis, "tort liability law" is the higher law, and "medical malpractice regulations" is the lower law, according to the "tort liability law" adopted by the effectiveness of forensic identification should be greater than the medical malpractice appraisal. However, the medical malpractice appraisal live in front of people, medical institutions encountered medical disputes, good at choosing medical malpractice appraisal procedures; from the legal analysis, medical malpractice appraisal of the conclusions of most of the conclusions in favor of the medical institutions, forensic appraisal, and more than in favor of the affected party; from the analysis of the law of development of science, forensic science belongs to the category of social sciences, and the law of development of the "reflexive "The law of development, a law, a new set of mechanisms began to operate. And medical malpractice appraisal due to the factors of medical professional knowledge, the nature of the natural science field, it is the development of the law of the "spiral" development law, from one to two, progress until infinity. The law of development of the two can not be the same; most directly, medical resources and medical staff to protect the work of the enthusiasm, the rights and interests of patients should also be protected, the two can not be biased. The use of forensic examination may be too harsh and critical of the medical side, may also have a certain impact on some medical theories, such as medical theories of surgical side injuries, comorbidities, complications, medical accidents, etc., in the forensic examination by the causal relationship will be covered. Not to talk about the medical characteristics, only medical effects, forensic identification will inevitably come to the conclusion that the infection is related to the operation, and may further describe the improper choice of surgical methods, preventive and control measures to prevent the infection of unfavorable conclusions. Such a conclusion would be powerful for the patient to obtain compensation and unfavorable for the medical practitioner. When choosing medical malpractice, surgical infections are generally categorized as a surgical complication, not an accident, and the doctor is not responsible. The doctor is not liable unless the patient finds that the doctor was at fault in preventing and controlling the infection. In a medical malpractice case, it is not easy for the patient to win because the resources and medical information are on the doctor's side. Surgical infection is a complication of surgery, and it is settled that it does not constitute an accident and is not liable for compensation. The judicial appraisal in the case of medical malpractice without discussing whether the formation of causal relationship between surgery and infection as the conclusion of the appraisal, the natural factors attributable to the responsibility of medical behavior, the doctor as "omnipotent". Will inevitably damage the interests of medical personnel and work enthusiasm, medical personnel's work enthusiasm to be struck by the negative effect of the general public in turn to the medical masses.
Judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal coexistence of confusion in addition to the theoretical aspects of the above example, but also manifested in the legal practice of unfairness. Judicial appraisal derived from the compensation program, standards, and years, is the "General Principles of Civil Law" in the compensation content. Medical malpractice appraisal is derived from the medical protection measures of the "low limit" compensation, in terms of disability grade, compensation standards, compensation for years and other aspects of the two are very different. Especially in the patient caused death or disability compensation, the General Principles of Civil Law provides for per capita disposable income, while the medical malpractice compensation is the average cost of living, the difference is nearly double. The existence of these differences will be supposed to "thank" the doctor-patient relationship into a more complex and prominent social conflicts.
In addition to the theoretical and practical aspects of the confusion, there is also about the judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal of the existence of who should go who should stay, or both continue to coexist. Legislators believe that since there is a "Tort Liability Law" as a higher law, "Medical Accident Regulations" as a lower law, there is no need to discuss the validity of the regulations; health people believe that forensic doctors do not understand clinical medicine, the State Council did not expressly abolish the regulations, the technical appraisal of medical accidents can not be replaced. Judicial appraisal is easy to be accepted by the patient side is to eliminate the "doctor to doctor appraisal" of the protection of the industry, the shortcomings of the appraisal of the lack of clinical expertise and appraisal of the scientific equipment. The reason for the medical side to favor the medical malpractice appraisal is that the medical malpractice appraisal can reflect the special characteristics of medical science, and no compensation will be made if it does not constitute an accident. Shortcomings in the confirmation of the accident is difficult, both have their own advantages and disadvantages. In order to better safeguard the interests of citizens' life and health, in order to better maintain the normal medical order and national medical resources, and promote the development of medical science, the legal status of the judicial appraisal can not be shaken, and medical malpractice appraisal program should not be abandoned. The key lies in how the nature of different cases, how to accurately choose identification. The compensation standard of medical malpractice should be consistent with the Tort Liability Law. Judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal coexistence of the confusion arising from some in practice can be resolved, some yet to be resolved by legislation, "medical malpractice regulations" does have the need for legislative amendments.
Two, the judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal of the difference
Judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal of the difference mainly includes, social attributes, organization, appraisal procedures, research direction and content, the court questioning and so on.
(A) the difference between social attributes
Judicial appraisal by the social appraisal institutions, judicial appraisal institutions by the judicial administrative department for approval of the establishment of the judicial administrative department for approval of the legal basis for the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress made the decision on the management of forensic appraisal. Therefore, the judicial appraisal belongs to the category of jurisprudence in the social sciences.
Medical malpractice appraisal conclusions are made by the medical malpractice appraisal committees under the medical associations at all levels, and the members of the medical malpractice appraisal committees are made up of medical experts, and the legal basis for the establishment of the medical malpractice appraisal committees is the "Medical Malpractice Handling Regulations", which was promulgated by the State Council, and therefore the medical malpractice appraisal should belong to the scope of the national administrative laws and regulations. Medical Accident Handling Measures" period, some people will be medical malpractice appraisal called "old son to son appraisal", now, medical appraisal is still not completely from the administrative organs in the "disengagement", can be called "brother to brother appraisal ". In addition, medical malpractice appraisal using medical knowledge, medicine is a natural science, medical malpractice appraisal certainly belongs to the field of natural science.
(ii) organizational differences
Judicial appraisal by the social appraisal institutions, appraisers shall be approved by the judicial administrative organs of registration, appraisal needs more than two people, involving specialties, professional and technical issues can be consulted with experts, and ultimately issued by the appraiser of the appraisal opinion.
Medical malpractice appraisal is organized by the medical association at all levels, the municipal level and provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the jurisdiction of the county and municipal level local medical association is responsible for organizing the first appraisal, the provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities are responsible for organizing the re-appraisal of the local medical association. The medical association establishes a pool of experts, which is set up according to the directory of discipline-specialized groups. The Chinese Medical Association is responsible for the identification of difficult, complex and significant impact of medical disputes.
(C) the difference between the identification process
1. the difference between the start of the process
Judicial appraisal can accept unilateral application, and medical malpractice appraisal does not accept unilateral application, need to be doctors and patients with **** with the application, or the Health Bureau designated, or the judicial organs commissioned;
2. the difference between the hearing process
Judicial appraisal can be based on the information provided by the client for identification, can not be organized The information provided by the client for identification, can not organize a hearing, can be unilateral written review, can also invite the relative to participate in the hearing. The medical malpractice appraisal must be provided by both parties to provide information and hearings attended by both parties.
3. Jurisdiction
Judicial appraisal is not subject to geographical restrictions, there is no level of restriction. The medical malpractice appraisal by the occurrence of accidents in the local municipal medical association for the first appraisal, the need for re-appraisal, by the province, autonomous region, municipalities directly under the Central Medical Association. Chinese Medical Association appraisal program is not required identification.
4. Identification of the difference between the time limit
Judicial appraisal should generally be issued within 15 days of the appraisal, need to be extended to 30 days, approved by the appraisal and consent of the client, the longest shall not exceed 60 days. Medical malpractice appraisal in the appraisal 7 days before the time, place, requirements in writing to the parties, from the date of receipt of the material, within 45 days of the organization appraisal and the issuance of the appraisal.
5. Appraisers sign the difference
Judicial appraisal of the appraisal must be signed by the appraisal. And medical malpractice experts to participate in the identification of experts do not sign the appraisal.
6. Professional consulting difference
Judicial appraisal for professional specialties and technical issues can consult local or foreign professional experts. And medical malpractice appraisal is generally affiliated with the pool of experts involved in the appraisal, when the number of experts in this pool of experts is insufficient, can be entrusted to another medical association.
7. Issuance of procedural differences
Judicial appraisal appraisal documents issued by the appraiser, when necessary, by the authorized review and approval of the issue. Medical malpractice appraisal issued by the head of the expert group.
8. Appraisal material difference
Judicial appraisal based on the information provided by the commissioner's samples for identification, conditions allow and necessary, the appraisal can be autopsy to extract pathological samples, pathological drug analysis; medical malpractice appraisal, the medical association does not organize an autopsy, do not produce samples, relying on the commissioner to provide samples and information for the argumentation and analysis. Judicial appraisal can do evidence review, medical malpractice appraisal, there is no autopsy affects the cause of death, the medical association does not accept the commission, no evidence review opinion.
(D) identification of the research direction and research content difference
Judicial appraisal of the direction of the study is generally the medical results of the patient's objections to the medical results of the causality involved in the analysis. The content of the study is whether the human body has been infringed upon, the degree of infringement, the end of medical treatment, the number and duration of nursing care, nutritional needs and the degree of causality involved.
Medical malpractice appraisal research direction is, whether the medical behavior violates the laws and regulations and technical operation standards, the content of its research is constitute an accident or not, the accident level, the degree of responsibility for the accident, medical care recommendations.
The essential difference between the two, one is the study of human life and health rights and interests, and the other is the study of medical behavior is lawful norms.
(E) the difference in the court questioning
Judicial appraisal of the expert in the court when needed, must appear in court to accept the questioning, otherwise the identification of conclusions will not be admissible. The experts who participated in the medical malpractice appraisal did not appear in court to accept the questioning of the case.
Three, the judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal of the legal status
Judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal of the *** with the legal status of the parties involved in the intermediate position, neither on behalf of the affected party, nor on behalf of the medical profession, the two kinds of appraisal in the civil trial are evidence.
While, the conclusion of the two kinds of appraisal in civil litigation are evidence, but, because of the two kinds of appraisal has its own characteristics, its legal status is different. First analysis, the judicial appraisal from the legal system, it produces the conclusion is proof of material, its legal status only belongs to the law in the evidence. Second analysis, medical malpractice appraisal from the administrative regulations, it produces the conclusion is not only civil evidence, also is the health administrative organs to deal with the administrative basis, its legal status naturally and civil evidence and administrative treatment based on the dual status. When the two are different, the judicial appraisal should be the main.
Four, medical malpractice appraisal and judicial appraisal of the problem
(A) the judicial appraisal of technical capacity and professional equipment
"Judicial appraisal of the General Principles" stipulates that do not have the technical capacity and equipment conditions can not accept the appraisal commission. Most of the social appraisal institutions lack of medical specialists and technicians, there is no drug and pathological analysis of professional equipment, often entrusted to other institutions to carry out auxiliary examination and drug and pathological analysis. The court is not the appraisal of the appraisal body for drug pathology analysis report of the appraisal conclusion, generally do not accept, as the appraisal body is not capable of appraisal.
For identification agencies do not have the professional equipment and technical ability to solve specialized problems, should not be commissioned by the identification of foreign institutions, but should be carried out by the client and provide the conclusions of the specialized issues, the identification of institutions can be reviewed and appraisal of the documentary evidence.
(B) the judicial appraisal of unilateral commissioning of the problem
Unilateral commissioning of the appraisal due to incomplete information, the lack of subjective medical records and medical defense, the court will not adopt the unilateral commissioning of the appraisal conclusions. Due to the limitation of the statute of limitations and the necessity to fight for the dominant evidence, and due to the appraisal organization is allowed to accept the unilateral commission, the legitimacy and feasibility of the unilateral commission of the appraisal can not be denied. Although the client and the appraiser has no right to require the appraisal of the other party must participate in the appraisal, however, the client and the appraiser can letter to inform the other party, do not participate as a waiver, forcing the other party to participate, the other party should also take the initiative to participate. In addition, the unilateral commissioning of the conclusion of the "flagpole effect" should not be ignored. Unilateral commissioned by the appraisal, litigation should be allowed to re-appraisal, to protect the other party's right to speak.
(C) the judicial appraisal of the lack of autopsy pathology report
Medical malpractice appraisal, there is no autopsy to affect the cause of death is not commissioned. Pathology report is the gold standard of identification, judicial appraisal without a pathology report, generally should not be entrusted. However, from the written material can be found in the cause of death and causal involvement, should accept the commission. This appraisal is a written review of the nature, the issuance of a certificate of review opinion.
(D) the judicial appraisal of professional questioning issues
Judicial appraisal is not possible to fully grasp the professional specialty knowledge. For a certain kind of professional specialty knowledge need professional consultation, this is the General Principles of Justice allows matters. Professional consulting materials should be attached to the appraisal of the public, should not be retained as an internal file. However, the consulting expert does not participate in the court examination as an expert.
(E) judicial appraisal of causality participation and medical malpractice appraisal of the degree of responsibility
Judicial appraisal of the degree of responsibility grading is currently no national standard, generally using a, b, c, d, e grading, some according to the "six-pointed method", and some according to the "five-pointed method", and the "five-pointed method". Some by "six-point method", some by "five-point method", and some by "four-point method", all points of the method to set the corresponding "responsibility coefficient". There are also directly assessed by the percentage method. These points are still at the level of academic review. In the legal judgment in the reference value status. Judicial appraisal of causality participation needs industry standardization.
Medical malpractice appraisal of the degree of responsibility is divided into all, major, minor, minor four grades, not divided into percentages. For the degree of responsibility trial judge discretionary percentage. Comparison of reasonable percentages should be calculated at twenty-five percentage points per grade.
Judicial appraisal, do not have to study the legal norms of medical behavior. Because, the medical behavior of the normative illegal problem belongs to the scope of medical malpractice appraisal.
(F) disability standards
In the medical malpractice appraisal of the disability standard applies to the "medical malpractice classification standards", and medical malpractice classification corresponds to the tenth degree of disability. And the judicial appraisal more than the "employee injury grading standards", the Beijing region to use the local forensic science association to develop standards. Each of the three standards has its own disparity, such as the total loss of function of a single hip, in the medical malpractice classification standard is a sixth-degree disability, in the employee work injury assessment standard is a fifth-degree disability, while the Beijing Municipal District Court uses the standard for the seventh-degree disability, the three are not the same. In view of the medical damage is a kind of negligence tort damage, compensation with a punitive factor, identification should be used high standard.
The application of disability standards there are symmetrical problems. Judicial appraisal can refer to medical malpractice "corresponding standards"; judicial appraisal can refer to no-fault labor security applicable to the "employee injury assessment of disability standards"; "employee non-work injury assessment of disability standards" whether to use the case of medical disputes, these need to be unified and clear.
(VII) appraisal of the problem of different conclusions
Medical malpractice appraisal in case of different conclusions with the judicial appraisal, the judicial appraisal institution can accept the application of the dissenting party, re-appraisal. But re-appraisal, should be only on the original judicial appraisal of the matter for re-examination and determination, not the medical malpractice appraisal as the basis for judgment, that is, follow the law of judicial appraisal, only study the causal relationship of medical results, do not study the fault of medical behavior.
(H) the judicial appraisal of the more difficult to determine the handling of the issue
clinical medical emergence of "unknowns" and "variable" is recognized by the medical profession of scientific knowledge. The client hopes to get through the appraisal of favorable conclusions, everyone has the idea. But due to the degree of science and objective conditions, and due to the development of the law of medicine itself, some medical disputes in the appraisal can not get the exact conclusion. At this time, it is inconvenient to simply make a positive or negative conclusions, should be scientifically "excluded" or "can not be excluded" approach to be concluded. For example, a woman, prenatal overdose of oxytocin, an intravenous injection of 25 units (5 units of the usual amount, the extreme amount shall not exceed 10 units), the birth of "amniotic fluid embolism", the failure to rescue death, heart blood found in the amniotic fluid in the tangible material. The patient believed that the maternal death was related to the overdose of oxytocin, but the doctor did not, stating that such doses had been used regularly without problems. Amniotic fluid embolism can occur in relation to oxytocin overdose or for other reasons. However, in view of the excessive use of oxytocin can not be excluded from the correlation, the Beijing Municipal Fayuan Judicial Appraisal Center was commissioned to make the conclusion: maternal overdose of oxytocin, can not be excluded from the excessive use of oxytocin led to excessive contraction of uterine smooth muscle, prompting residual amniotic fluid in the uterine wall to enter the maternal circulation, and the maternal death of the existence of a cause and effect relationship, this conclusion was adopted by the judge, and became a classic case.
(IX) the judicial determination of the death of the diagnosis of the name of the problem
Respiratory and circulatory failure is the patient to death of the pathological evolution of the process, not the name of the clinical diagnosis. But clinicians often take this pathological change as the name of death diagnosis.
When the patient died due to sudden illness, difficult and miscellaneous diseases, doctors often based on the patient's symptoms before death for death diagnosis. Such as circulatory respiratory failure. This kind of diagnosis is easy to cause the patient dispute. For this kind of dispute, identification should be analyzed from two parts, one is the original diagnosis is established, the second is the first aid measures are appropriate. If the diagnosis of the primary disease is correct and the rescue measures are appropriate, the pathologic diagnosis need not be disputed. If the diagnosis of the primary disease is not based on, and the treatment measures are inappropriate, the identification of respiratory and circulatory failure diagnosis should not be recognized. A patient was admitted to the hospital for surgery due to acute appendicitis, sudden dyspnea, cyanosis and vomiting during infusion, informed the medical staff, no special treatment. Symptoms worsened three hours later, and resuscitation failed. Diagnosis of death: acute respiratory and circulatory failure, diffuse peritonitis, cerebral hemorrhage? Acute pulmonary embolism? The body was not autopsied and cremated, and the residual bottle and night were not preserved. After the cremation of the body, a relative suggests that the hospital's death diagnosis name is not correct, should be the infusion reaction death. The patient's wife heard of the lawyer commissioned to apply for judicial appraisal, application matters: 1. death diagnosis is established; 2. rescue measures are appropriate. Through the judicial appraisal concluded: respiratory and circulatory failure is not a fatal independent disease; cerebral hemorrhage diagnosis lack of basis; the treatment of pulmonary embolism measures are not appropriate without the use of tracheodilator drugs, and the patient's death has a causal relationship, the degree of participation is 30%. The patient filed a civil action for damages on the grounds of misdiagnosis and malpractice.
(J) complications, comorbidities, medical accidents, surgical by-products
Medical malpractice appraisal, complications, comorbidities, medical accidents and surgical by-products are not medical malpractice. However, in the judicial appraisal should pay attention to, whether the above symptoms can be avoided, should be avoided did not avoid, the judicial appraisal should still find that there is a causal relationship.
(XI) judicial appraisal of important taboos
Judicial appraisal of the majority of the lack of clinical medical experience, social judicial appraisal and economic efficiency problems. Judicial appraisal is often "eager to achieve" and "quick success", for clinical medical theory is easy to ignore. Judicial appraisal must respect medical science! Not to medical science as the basis, can not get the correct medical dispute appraisal. A lower eye bags liposuction consumer, three days after the operation, eye pain headache, check the diagnosis for both eyes uveitis, stimulate retinal detachment. In the judicial appraisal, the doctor repeatedly emphasized that the consumer eyelids are not infected, the formation of uveitis and liposuction has nothing to do, but the appraiser in the absence of ophthalmology experts consulting the case, or to make uveitis and liposuction is directly related to the conclusion of the judge according to the conclusion of the appraisal judgment of the cosmetologist compensation. This case is a representative illustration of the judicial expert ignores the medical science, made the conclusion will not only affect the economic interests of the parties, but also undermine the scientific nature of the basic theory of medicine.
Conclusion:
The role of judicial appraisal in dealing with medical dispute cases is gradually reflected in the civil trial work. Because the judicial appraisal of the body and the mechanism system is not yet sound and perfect, appraisal organization's technical force is still insufficient, so the medical malpractice appraisal process should not be abandoned. Medical malpractice appraisal faces legal challenges, there are indeed many flaws, should be amended by legislation. In the medical damage judicial appraisal and medical malpractice appraisal in parallel at this stage, medical damage judicial appraisal no matter in the legal theory or legal application, are not lost as an important means of judging the responsibility of medical fault. However, in the case of "medical malpractice regulations" has not been expressly invalidated, medical malpractice case appraisal also shoulder to improve the doctor-patient relationship, and promote harmony between doctors and patients important social responsibility. The phenomenon that "saving lives and helping injuries" may also be held liable for compensation reflects the civilization of legal progress; however, it cannot be denied that it also reflects the decline of social morality and ethics. Therefore, shoulder medical disputes judicial appraisal of the expert and medical malpractice appraisal of medical experts should respect medicine, respect the law, impartial scientific appraisal.
[1] Cui Gao Ming, born in September 1952, male, Han nationality, Heilongjiang Jiamusi people, director of Heilongjiang Advance Law Firm, the second level of lawyers, surgeons, research direction: the prevention and treatment of medical disputes.
[2] Cui Xiuyu, born in July 1980, male, Han nationality, Heilongjiang Jiamusi, Heilongjiang Qianjin Law Firm Director Assistant, Bachelor of Laws, research direction: health law.