标签:
人文/历史 |
悲剧之后,重要的是法律如何得到修订?
袁晓明
丈夫不签字导致孕妇李丽云、婴儿双亡的悲剧,原因是多方面的,但说到底,一个重要的原因就是是中国还没有高举生命、并同时尊重个人权利的医疗管理法律。
比较中美两国的法律,显而易见,在这一方面,美国的法律有更全面的管辖,法律的制订者已经预见到家人可能拒绝签字的情况,因此,法律非常明确地规定,在病人生命危机的情况下,如果家人拒绝签字,医院就可以通过一定的程序,在没有家人签字的条件下,就能够对病人实施挽救生命的手术,而中国的法律在这方面的规定却不明确,《医疗机构管理条例》第三十三条的“其它特殊情况”就非常含糊,现行法律更多的是责任的分担,主要是让病人和家属承担责任。参照美国的法律,医院不仅要有道义上的责任,而且需要在法律上有权给病人施行手术,同时医院也不能剥夺病人和家人的权利,因此,悲剧之后,最重要的是对相关法律的修订,从法律上最大限度避免李丽云悲剧的重演。
在一个民主与法制的社会,公民不应该寄希望媒体上的喧闹就可以引起某些领导比如卫生局的注意,从而领导们在报纸的边缝上写下一道道批示,接着,一个政府机构就以此修订管理条例,那样虽然有了新的法规,但仍然是人治的旧习,在一个追求民主与法制的国家,公民需要的是,他们可以找到能够代表自己的立法代表,对法律的修改提出要求,更应该有民选的立法代表主动收集民意,从而按照民意去制订新的法律以及修该现有的法律。此外,非常重要的是,除了以法律限制家人对病人生命的否决权外,更需要加上新的条款,比如杜绝医院以付不起手术费而不给予手术救治,那其实是一个更需要关注的方面,也就是所有人在生命的被拯救上享有同等的待遇,特别是让那些贫穷的公民不会因为自己的贫穷而放弃生命的权利。
如何将媒体讨论过渡到法律的修订,其实是更具实际的意义,问题是,除了在媒体和网络上发表言论外,有多少人试图或者能够与自己的立法代表取得联系?有没有立法代表提议对相关法律进行修改?最大的问题:有没有一个民主的程序去实现法律的制订和修订?如果对于这样的问题,得到的都是否定的答案,公民仍然只能坐等领导批示,坐等政府机关对法律的更改,这一场讨论在很大程度上就失去了大半的意义。更重要的是,除了医疗管理条例以外,中国需要制订更多新的法律,还有许多的现行法律需要修改,因此,公民如何参与法律的制订和修改其实有更加广大和深远的意义。
------
附件:
美国法律的原文:
If the guardian, spouse, or next of kin cannot be contacted through exercise of reasonable diligence, or if the guardian, spouse, or next of kin is contacted, but refuses to consent, then the emergency surgery may be performed upon the written authorization of the chief medical officer and after court approval has been obtained. However, if delay in obtaining court approval would create a grave danger to the life of the resident, the chief medical officer may authorize surgery, in writing, without court approval. If the surgery is authorized without court approval, the chief medical officer who made the authorization and the physician who performed the surgery shall each execute an affidavit describing the circumstances constituting the emergency and warranting the surgery and the circumstances warranting their not obtaining prior court approval. The affidavit shall be filed with the court with which the request for prior approval would have been filed within five court days after the surgery, and a copy of the affidavit shall be placed in the resident’s file and shall be given to the guardian, spouse, or next of kin of the resident, to the hospital at which the surgery was performed, and to the legal rights service created by section 5123.60 of the Revised Code.
“如果家人拒绝同意手术,在获得the chief medical officer 的书面同意后,紧急手术可以进行”这一条就让医生有权力在丈夫不签字的情况下进行手术。
If the guardian, spouse, or next of kin cannot be contacted through exercise of reasonable diligence, or if the guardian, spouse, or next of kin is contacted, but refuses to consent, then the emergency surgery may be performed upon the written authorization of the chief medical officer and after court approval has been obtained. However, if delay in obtaining court approval would create a grave danger to the life of the resident, the chief medical officer may authorize surgery, in writing, without court approval. If the surgery is authorized without court approval, the chief medical officer who made the authorization and the physician who performed the surgery shall each execute an affidavit describing the circumstances constituting the emergency and warranting the surgery and the circumstances warranting their not obtaining prior court approval. The affidavit shall be filed with the court with which the request for prior approval would have been filed within five court days after the surgery, and a copy of the affidavit shall be placed in the resident’s file and shall be given to the guardian, spouse, or next of kin of the resident, to the hospital at which the surgery was performed, and to the legal rights service created by section 5123.60 of the Revised Code.
“如果家人拒绝同意手术,在获得the chief medical officer 的书面同意后,紧急手术可以进行”这一条就让医生有权力在丈夫不签字的情况下进行手术。