جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "برائت" در نشریات گروه "پزشکی"

Since the rules and conditions of the criminal and civil responsibility of the doctor in the current laws of Iran are collected in a unified law, i.e. the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2012, in some writings, the aforementioned rules are mixed. Despite this, the said rulings are independent of each other and there is no connection between them. Therefore, the necessity and importance of the present research is evident. This research, especially emphasizing the common nature of the institution of dowry, confirms the fact that most of the rulings of dowry follow the rules of civil liability.

The present research was compiled with the qualitative research method and content analysis and by collecting information from library sources and referring to laws and legal articles.

The results of the research indicate that the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2013 is in harmony with the legal principles and jurisprudence foundations in the position of separating the boundaries of two types of civil and criminal responsibility of the doctor towards the patients: separating the nature and effects of the patient’s consent from the condition of the doctor’s acquittal. And paying attention to the difference in the concept of fault in criminal and civil law is one of the strengths of the law.

By criticizing and analyzing the legal thoughts about the legal responsibility of doctors, it seems that some of the rules of the civil liability of doctors have been mixed with the punishments. In addition, the provisions of the law are flawed and ambiguous in some cases: it is objectionable to apply imprisonment in the case of the patient’s death due to medical malpractice, if the doctor’s malice or the commission of a criminal offense is not evident. Therefore, the application of Article 616 of the Penal Law approved in 2006 is excluded from cases of civil fault and in these cases only the guarantee of ransom is established. In addition, the defects and ambiguity related to the determination of illegitimate medical practices can be resolved by passing special laws.

The discovery of stem cell and then the efficiency of its use in the treatment of incurable patients has caused a wave of public favor towards it. Parallel to the scientific research about this amazing phenomenon and the scientific discourse about it among the medical community, the legal community has also reacted to it. They consider the cells to be free of defects and fundamental problems and rather a desirable thing, but some others, with a deeper legal perspective, see the treatment contracts through said cells as facing challenges. The high risk of the treatment in question, which causes the related contract to be invalidated, the possibility of irreparable physical damage, which makes it a loss. Doubts related to the realization of consent in patients, legal problems of obtaining acquittal from the patient and the unknown aspects of the discussed treatment are among its challenging issues. In terms of its dominant and useful aspects, these contracts can finally solve the mentioned challenges. Most of the studies conducted on stem cells are medical research. The aim of the current research is to get to know the issues that can legally challenge the treatment contracts related to it. As well as having a brief look at the value of these challenges.

This article employs a descriptive-analytical approach, relying on library research, to identify and analyze the primary legal challenges associated with stem cell research. Additionally, it provides a brief introduction to stem cells and their applications in treatment.

Ethical Considerations: 

In this research, the authors have considered themselves committed to complying with the ethical principles related to scientific research and in this regard, they have been extremely careful to pay attention to the originality of cited texts, respect the rights of authors, trustworthiness and honesty in quoting materials.

Treatment contracts have become an essential requirement for the general population, highlighting the need to examine them from a legal perspective. Consequently, varying degrees of attention have been devoted to this area. While these contracts may not be completely immune to legal challenges, a thorough examination reveals their potential legal validity and defensibility.

Treatment contracts have been accepted as an inevitable necessity among the masses of people. This has made it necessary to look at it from a legal point of view and therefore more or less attention has been paid to it. It seems that the contracts in question are not immune from legal challenges, but a closer look finally makes them legally defensible. Treatment contracts, including the contractual relationship of the patient or the cell donor with the treatment or research institute or with other agents and intermediaries, from the point of view of traditional legal foundations, have challenges such as risk-taking, greed, transactional ignorance; ambiguity in the validity of contractual consent, the issue of acquittal from responsibility is faced. A relative look at the concepts of risk, ignorance, etc. is one of the ways to get rid of these challenges.

Dental malpractice claims have increased in recent years. Investigating the reasons for dental malpractice can help dentists overcome this issue by providing high-quality service and promoting patient safety. This study aims to investigate the prevalence of malpractice in dentistry in Khorramabad, Iran and its possible reasons.

In this descriptive cross-sectional study, we examined all closed cases of dental malpractice registered by the forensic medicine organization and the medical system in Khorramabad, Iran during 2012-2016, and evaluated contributing factors including demographic factors and type of malpractice. Data analysis was performed in SPSS v.22 software.

Out of 73 complaint cases, 65 were evaluated in this study. The mean age of patients was 33.49±10.65. Most of complainants were female (59.3%) aged  30-45 years (41.5%), with a university degree (26.2%), residing in urban areas (70.8%). The maximum interval between the time of treatment and the time of complaint registration was less than one year (72.1%). The majority of complaints were against male dentists (87.5%) with general dentistry education (54.7%). The most frequent final verdict was the malpractice of dentist (49.1%). The majority of malpractices were from negligence type (32%), and most of the complaints were related to performing surgery alone (33.8%).

Most of the dentists with malpractice in Khorramabad city are male general dentists, mostly in the field of surgery. Most of complainants are females. To reduce the incidence of dental malpractice and limit their consequences, it is necessary to develop control strategies and promote the education and training of dental practitioners.

Informed consent to treatment, although the requirement is for medical procedures, but not a sufficient condition for the exemption of medical liability and it is necessary to obtain exemptions from and its kind in the condition of responsibility is interpreted by doctors, therefore, if the patient has not written a physician innocence and his actions caused damage to the patient, whether the defect or lost, will be in charge of civil and criminal.

This research is of theoretical type and the research method is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library and has been done by referring to documents, books and articles.

Ethical Considerations:

 In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed.

According to the Penal Code approved in 1392 to treat a patient if the doctor was acquitted and the depreciation cannot be guaranteed. Of course, academic satisfaction must have the legal status to be referred to the and as a general rule it can be said patient treatment without his consent, except in cases of emergency the practical responsibility is binding, why is the right of every human being that has jurisdiction over your body and soul and is protected by law.

One of the basic principles of respect for individual autonomy in medical ethics and public morality, and as a principle is accepted, it's right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as "the right to security of person" expressed and the constitution of the Islamic Republic of attack mentioned in Article 22 of the immunity of body and soul is and 495 to 497 of the Penal Code of 1392 also referred to the issue of physician responsibility.

Doctor civil liability one of the most important and controversial issues in the field of civil liability has always been. This article to address the important issue of how a doctor's civil liability arises from an emergency tries.

This article is Analytical descriptive and uses the library method.

Ethical Considerations:

 In this article, originality of texts, honesty and trusteeship has been complied with.

Doctor civil liability in emergency situations is subject to fault theory. This means that if he harms the patient by observing scientific points, he is not responsible and if the damage occurs in accordance with medical principles, the doctor's civil liability will be revoked. In urgent and urgent cases, it is not necessary to obtain the patient's consent and innocence and if the doctor in case of emergency does not obtain the consent of the patient or his guardian, he is not a guarantor.

The legislator has considered innocence as one of the necessary conditions to absolve a doctor of responsibility, but in cases such as urgency, this general principle is ignored. If the patient's condition is such that it requires urgent treatment, while he is unable to give consent and there is not enough time, the doctor is in a state of emergency. Therefore, according to the jurists, this is not urgency, but a function of the rule of the rule of benevolence and it has no responsibility.

 The Islamic  Punishment law of 1392, while accepting the doctor's guarantee in treatments that even with the patient's permission, has introduced one of the ways of not guaranteeing the acquisition of previous innocence.the doctor's discharge according law  is count if the patient is obliged and able to discharge the doctor, Its the patient's right, and if he is not obliged (minor or insane) or obliged but for reasons such as anesthesia is unable to discharge the doctor, It’s the Right of "Patients Wali".the issue of this research  is about the range of acceptance of this view among jurists, other possible statements and the strengths and weaknesses of this statement compared to those statements and finally, the expression of the preferred statement.The authors' hypothesis is that most jurists oppose the promise contained in the law and, on the contrary, strengthen the argumentative foundations of those who beliguareve in the right of the "patient's wali" to be acquitted of the guarantee resulting from the patient's death; Whether obligated or not.

 The Current article, with its analytical and descriptive method and following the sayings of Imami jurists from the earliest to the latest, has been in a position to prove this hypothesisand has come to the conclusion that the Islamic Punishment Law, should be amended in such a way that the physician is acquitted. Pre-said to be done by the "Patients wali".

 When the patient's life is discussed, the majority of jurists do consider the right to discharge  a doctor to belong to man himself and - when he is not obligated - his religious Wali and consider it in the exclusive competence of "avenger of blood" In contrast to this majority, there are minorities who consider it their right to discharge the doctor. The jurists who consider the the right of discharge of doctor to patient himself, if he is not obliged, naturally recognize the application of this right for his "religious Wali". A small number of jurists, recognizing this right for both the patient and the guardian, They are cautious about this issue and recommend the physician to absolve himself from both.

Ethical considerations: 

This research has been written on the principles of ethics, honesty and trustworthiness while maintaining and accuracy in the originality of the texts.

The legislator's action in granting the right to discharge a doctor to the patient or - when he is not obliged or unable to discharge - to his religious Wali to acquit the guarantee resulting from his death is against the opinion of the majority of Imami jurists and acceptable reasons There is a weakness. Therefore, it is necessary to amend Article 495 of the Islamic punishment law and Note 2 thereof to give the right to discharge a doctor in the aforementioned cases to the "patients blood avenger", it means the same claimant.

In the issues related to practical principles and in the field of communication with obligatory rulings, many issues have been raised by fundamentalists, but status and legal rulings have been less discussed. It should be noted that in the current society, some issues are encountered that are challenging.It is as if the principles of practice have been applied to a matter and a ruling has been issued in a way that is related to the rights of individuals. In fact, the execution of a sentence by the obligor, the legislator or social legitimacy is based on practical principles, and after issuing the sentence, it is discovered that the requirement of the principle was contrary to the fact, and therefore we must see what the answer is. This issue, in addition to the responsibility of physicians in the valley of practical principles and the legal realm that indicates it, due to the inherent importance hidden in the case of practical principles, has been deeply explored in the current research in an analytical-descriptive manner. The results of the study indicate that medicine has long been considered a vital profession and these physicians, as people with social status, have always been trusted by the public. Also, the importance of the position and vitality of physicianschr('39') activities has increased the scope of their responsibilities. Based on this importance, jurisprudence, in regulating the physician-patient relationship, has tried to make the treatment process the best it can be, although the obligations and rights of each party to the relationship have been determined in order to provide supportive, vital activities. Include medicine and on the other hand prevent any kind of abuse or abuse of the patient and doctorchr('39')s possible rights. Therefore, as long as no court documents are presented against the physician in connection with the infliction of damages on the patient, the law has counted the acquittal of the physician so that he is not responsible for compensating the losses, and therefore the procedure of practical principles speaks for itself.

Adherence to the standard process of obtaining informed consent from patients in the field of therapeutic activities can play an important role in reducing the complaints of physicians and other therapists and consequently reducing legal and judicial interventions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of knowledge of Jahrom clinicians about patient satisfaction and acquittal (2018).
Methods and Materials:This is a descriptive cross-sectional study. Twenty-five clinicians participated in the study in 2018. Data gathering tool was standard satisfaction and acquittal questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical tests.

The mean level of knowledge was 11.12 2± 2.44. Also, the lowest level of knowledge was 6 and the highest was 16. The level of knowledge in 4 people (16%) was unacceptable, 19 (76%) moderate and only 2 (8%) were unacceptable. The overwhelming majority of specialists (91.7%) had liability insurance and 39.1% stated that they were risk-takers and 56.5% stated that they were somewhat risk-takers and only 4.3% stated that they were not.

The results of this study showed that 76% of participants in this study had moderate knowledge. Lack of familiarity with consent can lead to problems for the medical community and endanger the health of the community. Therefore, legal training should be provided through retraining programs and workshops designed to enhance the information of clinical professionals.

Since the beginning of the Imamia school of thought, Imamia scholars paid a great attention to issue of physicians’ responsibility. With a long-lasting debate on this issue, in most cases they have confirmed physician’s responsibility in medical error. However, in terms of a skilled medical doctor who treats the patient with no medical error but harm occurs, there is no consensus. Some scholars have said that if the physician had the patient’s (or family) consent for the treatment, then the physician is not guilty. In the contrary, some scholars believe that the physician still should bear the responsibility.This paper aims to examine the Islamic Pinal Code (no. 495) by relying on changing trajectory Imamia jurisprudence in exchange for claimed physicians’ responsibility. The legislators in Article 495 of the Islamic Penal Code (Act. 92), seems to take into account both mentioned perspectives and try to choose a middle way. However, in practice, this has caused confusion.

Medical measures performed by the medical staff, are in fact a kind of intervention, subject to legal provisions mentioned in various laws (e.g. Articles 158 and 495 of the Iranian Civil Law). Given the legal andjurisprudential backgraound of these articles, patient’s consent relates only to legitimacy of the “physician’s deed” (i.e.treatment) and not to its consequences (either incidental or intentional), and that is the reason for having the patient to sign a disclaimer (to relieve the physician from legal liabilities). All shia’a Faqihs (jurisprudence experts) believe in the necessity of obtaining patient’s consent, except in cases of emergency, for initiating treatment, while there is disagreement regarding the issue of disclaimer, and a majority of Faqihs recommend obtaining disclaimer from the patient in case treatment-induced harms occur. However, the Islamic Penal Code of 2013, does not mention various kinds of consent (i.e.explicit, implicit, informed) and sanctions of not obtaining it, and considers it, by altering the bases, a vain deed, since it depends on non-guiltiness of the physician. The present article discusses various kinds of consent, disclaimer and sanctions of not obtaining it, load of proof, timing of obtaining consent, from legal as well as jurisprudential viewpoints.

One of the most important issues in medical law and acquit the effect of satisfaction on the physician's responsibility and whether the effect of informed consent requirement was acquitted on a charge of the same doctor¡ Leave alone if you do not blame the doctor and the patient is informed and comply with all technical and scientific standards of medical doctors will eliminate civil and criminal liability As the effect of the presumption of innocence, the right precautions and medical malpractice or liability shall be. In this paper, we plan to investigate the pros and cons and criticism of jurists and lawyers are sufficiently informed consent of acquittal on the charge of doctor, provided exemptions from liability, responsibility of the physician to adjust to shift the burden of proof because the doctor's patients ¡Unlike the famous jurists that the former law was based on his opinion And strict liability without fault of the doctor in Articles 319, 320 and 321 of the Penal Code of the former was evident; But this problem has been resolved in the Penal Code Act 1392 and Article 495 of the fault has been responsible physician bound¡ This study is a descriptive - analytical definitions and understanding of the principles, rules and referring to the jurisprudence of the "traditional method with disciplined analysis" rights "rational method of descriptive language" explained. Finally, informed consent in accordance with the views expressed by the condition of the patient has a similar function has been acquitted of liability and depends on the nature and limits of the patient's permission, which permission to waste time (in terms of nonfamous jurists) and sometimes restricted or conditional permission to health (famous jurists).

Taking exemption from the patient or his guardian is a precondition that Iranian Legislator see as necessary for excluding responsibility from the physician in any legal medical operation, following to popular view in Islamic law (fig’h). According to article 495 from the Islamic Penal Law: “The physician is responsible for blood-money if he causes death or physical injury in his treatments, unless he observes the medical standards or takes exemption before the operation”. Despite emphasizing on necessity of taking exemption in the second part, the first note of article 495 states: “The physician hasn’t responsibility in case of lacking fault & negligence in the theory & practice, although he doesn’t take exemption”. So there is a kind of incompatibility between the article and its note. This essay is to present a solution for this problem by focusing on taking exemption from the patient or his guardian before any operation or treatment.

Patients claims are one of the most important working stresses in medical profession. Dissatisfaction and claims of patients from medial doctors are one of the important problems in the society. Here we propose to evaluate the level of knowledge of surgeons and anesthesiologists about clearance and satisfaction in Kerman.

This cross-sectional study, was conducted in 2010, 120Investigation of knowledge level of surgeons and anesthesiologists on clearance and satisfaction In Kermanstudied by census method collecting data from self-made questionnaire and data analysis software SPSS17 square K and T test were used.

In this study, 83.3% were professional surgeons and 16.7% were anesthesiologists73/4% had good awareness from the total number but 10/8% had unacceptable awareness. The knowledge score of anesthesiologists 14.9±2 was higher than general surgeons 12.9±8.3 (p=0.024). The knowledge score on the basis of sex and years of experience was not different.

It got clear that the good knowledge of people who have been studied was not acceptable and lack ofknowledge in consent and clearance can make problems for the medical society and endanger the health of the society. So it is necessary to have legal trainings to increase treatment group information with educational workshops and retraining programs.