發(fā)布時間：2018-03-23 17:08

  本文選題：北京市　切入點：醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解　出處：《北京中醫(yī)藥大學》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：醫(yī)療糾紛的有效解決很大程度上取決于能夠根據(jù)醫(yī)療糾紛的特點而選擇相適應的醫(yī)療糾紛解決方式。不同情況、不同特點的醫(yī)療糾紛要求不同的醫(yī)療糾紛解決方式來解決,醫(yī)療糾紛的解決方式不應是單一的,而應形成一種多元化的糾紛解決機制。從實踐來看,醫(yī)療糾紛主要通過醫(yī)患雙方當事人自主協(xié)商、醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解委員會調(diào)解或者法院訴訟等途徑來解決。但是,以北京地區(qū)為例,協(xié)商的范圍有限,對于在公立醫(yī)療機構發(fā)生的患方索賠金額1萬元以上的醫(yī)療糾紛,只能通過北京市醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解委員會調(diào)解或者訴訟的方式解決。 醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解具有調(diào)解免費、程序靈活、周期較短以及緩和醫(yī)患雙方對立情緒等優(yōu)勢,但也存在著諸如調(diào)解協(xié)議不具有強制執(zhí)行力等缺陷；訴訟途徑解決醫(yī)療糾紛無論最終的結案方式是調(diào)解還是判決,均具有強制執(zhí)行力,但是,訴訟在解決醫(yī)療糾紛的過程中也有其固有的缺陷,諸如成本高昂、周期較長、法官無法判斷專業(yè)性很強的醫(yī)學問題以及當事人之間的對立情緒無法得到緩解等。在解決醫(yī)療糾紛的過程中,醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解和訴訟存在著各自的優(yōu)缺點,將二者銜接起來在一定程度上可以解決這一問題,目前,北京地區(qū)有三個區(qū)縣法院正在試點,且取得了一定成績。 本文旨在通過對北京市醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解與訴訟銜接現(xiàn)狀進行研究,歸納現(xiàn)有銜接模式,挖掘銜接過程中存在的問題,找出完善的建議對策,完善北京市醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解與訴訟銜接機制,更好地解決現(xiàn)有的日益激化的醫(yī)療糾紛,緩和醫(yī)患之間的緊張關系,構建和諧的醫(yī)患環(huán)境。為了實現(xiàn)這一研究目標,本研究查閱了大量的國內(nèi)外文獻資料,了解國內(nèi)的醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解機制的優(yōu)缺點及訴訟機制的特點,二者銜接的狀況,以及國外類似制度的具體做法；采用電話訪談的方式,對北京市醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解委員會成立以來的轉調(diào)案件整體進行電話訪談,并結合在北京市西城區(qū)人民法院和北京市醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解委員會實習過程中收集到的典型案例、對調(diào)解員和法官以及相關專家的訪談,了解北京市醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解與訴訟銜接的現(xiàn)狀。 研究發(fā)現(xiàn),北京市醫(yī)療糾紛人民調(diào)解委員會與訴訟銜接的現(xiàn)有表現(xiàn)形式主要有訴前轉調(diào)、訴中委托調(diào)解和達成調(diào)解協(xié)議后的司法確認三種。取得了一定的成效：為當事人提供了一種方便快捷、省時省力的糾紛解決途徑；轉調(diào)案件經(jīng)醫(yī)調(diào)委調(diào)解,緩和了當事人之間的矛盾沖突,促進了訴訟調(diào)解的成功；人民調(diào)解協(xié)議的司法確認程序賦予調(diào)解協(xié)議以強制執(zhí)行力,給當事人吃了一顆“定心丸”。也存在著一定的問題：試點范圍有限；銜接的程序不一,且缺乏長效機制；監(jiān)督機制不健全,易出現(xiàn)強制轉調(diào)或不愿轉調(diào)的現(xiàn)象；調(diào)解員的素質(zhì)直接影響調(diào)解的結果；司法確認審查過于形式化,易滋生后續(xù)問題。針對以上問題,提出了相應的完善建議：擴大試點范圍；統(tǒng)一銜接程序,建立長效機制；完善監(jiān)督機制；提高調(diào)解員素質(zhì)；嚴格司法確認的審查。
[Abstract]:To effectively solve the medical disputes depends largely on according to the characteristics of medical disputes and choose to adapt the way of medical dispute resolution of medical disputes. In different situations, different characteristics of the different requirements of the medical dispute resolution to solve, the way of solving the medical dispute is not single, but should form a diversified dispute resolution mechanism. From the point of view of practice, medical disputes mainly through patient parties consultations, medical dispute mediation committee for mediation or court proceedings and other ways to solve. However, taking Beijing area as an example, the limited scope of the consultation, to occur in public medical institutions who claim the amount of 10 thousand yuan of medical disputes, only through mediation Beijing Municipal People's medical dispute mediation committee or litigation to resolve.
The medical dispute mediation mediation procedure with free, flexible, short cycle and ease the doctor-patient antagonism and other advantages, but also exists such as the mediation agreement is not enforceable and other defects; litigation to solve medical disputes whether the final settlement is mediation or judgment, enforceable, but also procedural defects there are inherent in the process of solving the medical dispute in, such as high cost, long cycle, the judge cannot determine the antagonism between the medical problems of highly professional and the parties will not ease. In the process of solving the medical dispute, medical dispute mediation and litigation are the advantages and disadvantages of the two. Link up to a certain extent can solve this problem, at present, Beijing has three district court is a pilot, and achieved certain results.
This paper aims at the study of the Beijing Municipal People's medical dispute mediation and litigation status, summarizes the existing connection mode, there is convergence problems in the process of mining, find out the countermeasures perfect, perfect the Beijing Municipal People's medical dispute mediation and litigation mechanism, to better solve the increasing medical disputes, easing tensions between doctors and patients the construction of harmonious doctor-patient relationship. In order to achieve this goal, this study examined a large number of domestic and foreign literature, the characteristics and disadvantages of the lawsuit mechanism of understanding domestic medical dispute mediation mechanism, two convergence conditions, and specific practices of similar systems abroad; using telephone interviews conducted telephone interview of Beijing Municipal People's medical dispute mediation committee. Since the establishment of the whole case, combined with the Beijing City People's court and Xicheng District The typical cases collected from the people's mediation committee of medical disputes in Beijing, and interviews with mediators, judges and related experts were conducted to understand the current situation of people's mediation and litigation connection in Beijing medical disputes.
The study found that the existing form of the convergence of Beijing Municipal People's medical dispute mediation committee and litigation are the main transfer before litigation, litigation mediation commission and the judicial confirmation after a mediation agreement is reached three. Certain achievements have been made: for the parties to provide a convenient, saves time and labor disputes resolution; the cases. Medical tune mediation committee, to ease the conflicts between the parties, to promote the success of the lawsuit mediation; people's mediation agreement judicial confirmation procedures give the mediation agreement of enforcement, the parties to eat a "reassurance". There are also some problems: the scope of the pilot program is limited; cohesion, and lack of long-term mechanism; supervision mechanism is not perfect, prone to compulsive or unwilling to transfer the modulation phenomenon; the quality of mediators directly affect the outcome of mediation; judicial confirmation review is too formal, The following problems are easy to breed. For the above problems, the corresponding suggestions are put forward: expand the scope of the pilot, unite the procedures, establish long-term mechanism, perfect the supervision mechanism, improve the quality of the mediator, and strictly examine the judicial confirmation.

【學位授予單位】：北京中醫(yī)藥大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：R-051;D922.16

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 熊躍敏;訴訟上和解的比較研究[J];比較法研究;2003年02期

2 劉鐘琴;;人民調(diào)解協(xié)議司法確認程序的反思與建構[J];研究生法學;2011年05期

3 陳志新;關于在發(fā)展人民調(diào)解制度中吸納國外ADR成果的思考[J];中國司法;2005年04期

4 陳美雅;;醫(yī)療糾紛訴訟外解決機制比較研究[J];法律與醫(yī)學雜志;2006年03期

5 尹曉艷;;人民調(diào)解協(xié)議效力探微[J];公民與法(法學版);2012年01期

6 李宗海;劉燕;倪小蘭;;論我國醫(yī)療糾紛訴訟解決機制的完善[J];重慶科技學院學報(社會科學版);2013年01期

7 鐘三宇;陳曉霞;;我國訴調(diào)對接糾紛解決機制的制度構建[J];重慶理工大學學報(社會科學);2013年02期

8 楊自根;張新華;汪麗青;;國內(nèi)外醫(yī)療糾紛非訴訟解決機制的比較研究[J];健康研究;2010年03期

9 李守全;溫凌潔;;引入人民調(diào)解化解醫(yī)患糾紛的實踐與思考[J];中國衛(wèi)生監(jiān)督雜志;2010年06期

10 孫忠河;潘淮寧;;醫(yī)患糾紛人民調(diào)解機制的現(xiàn)狀探析[J];西部醫(yī)學;2011年07期

，

本文編號：1654388