Study On The Causal Relationship Of Liability For Infringement Of Patients’ Informed Consent Rights

Informed consent,as an independent right of patients in the process of diagnosis and treatment,has been widely accepted and recognized,and more and more cases are filed on the grounds of infringement in judicial practice.The identification of damage and causality is different from the traditional diagnosis and treatment of negligence tort,which needs to be clarified.The first part adopts the paradigm of empirical research to clarify the path of judicial judgment and examines the fact that judges in practice do not fully expand the problem of causality as the focus of reasoning,and do not carefully analyze the impact of doctors’violation of the obligation to inform and explain on the choice or consent of patients,Or if the doctor does not have other medical errors except the obligation of notification,the causal relationship is deemed to be nonexistent,and the judicial determination of causal relationship is insufficient in practical trials.The second part analyzes the reasons for the infringement of the independence of patients’ informed consent right and responsibility in the system,and introduces the particularity of "cause" and "result" in the causal relationship elements.The third part interprets the changed rules from the viewpoint of legal hermeneutics in combination with the relevant provisions of the Civil Code,and proposes that the identification of causality in violation of patients’ informed consent rights and responsibilities has particularity,and the "if nothing,no" rule cannot be directly applied.On the basis of the application of extraction method and substitution method,it is judged whether the doctor’s failure to fully fulfill the obligation of disclosure has a substantial impact on the choice of patients.If the patient is properly informed of the complete medical information,alternative therapy and the risks of treatment before the implementation of diagnosis and treatment,he or she may refuse the current treatment plan and choose conservative treatment or other alternative therapy,indicating that the doctor’s disclosure of the fault really affects the patient’s decision of will,thus depriving him or her of the opportunity of independent choice.The possible outcomes of patients making different choices are compared with real outcomes to see if there is an "actual benefit difference" between what should be and what is.If the cure rate can be improved or the actual damage can be avoided or alleviated,it means that the medical provider violates the obligation to inform the patient and causes the patient to have wrong understanding without sufficient medical information,make wrong choices based on the untrue meaning,and fail to receive the most appropriate treatment and suffer actual damage.Therefore,there is a causal relationship between the doctor’s violation of the patient’s informed consent right and the patient’s damage.