Cloatre Emilie
Professor of Law, Co-Director of Research, Kent Law School, Eliot Building, University of Kent, Canterbury CT27NS, UK.
Med Law Rev. 2019 May 1;27(2):189-214. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwy024.
This article explores the ambiguities of the legal system that, in France, regulates 'alternative healing', and determines the boundaries of legitimate medical care. While the law suggests that the delivery of therapeutic care should be the monopoly of biomedically-trained professionals, alternative healers operate very widely, and very openly, in France. They practice, however, on the verge of (il)legality, often organising their activities, individually and collectively, so as to limit the likelihood of state intervention. This creates a high degree of precarity for both practitioners and, crucially, for patients. Efforts to change the system are being deployed, but while healers themselves have increasingly organised to seek recognition by the state, alternative healing occupies an uncertain policy space: they are not fully constituted as a social and policy matter by the state, and occupy a liminal position between medicine and spirituality that "unsettles" republican ideals of scientific rationality, and of secularism. This article explores some of those tensions, at the crossroad between law, science, and medicine. It reflects on why tensions seem to persist around the regulatory questions at stake, and suggests that ways forward may depend on moving away from science as a sole arbiter in drawing boundaries of legitimate and illegitimate care in regulation.
本文探讨了法国法律体系中存在的模糊性,该法律体系对“替代疗法”进行规范,并确定合法医疗护理的界限。虽然法律规定提供治疗护理应由接受生物医学培训的专业人员垄断,但在法国,替代疗法从业者的活动范围非常广泛且公开。然而,他们的执业处于(不)合法的边缘,常常单独或集体组织活动,以降低国家干预的可能性。这给从业者以及至关重要的患者都带来了高度的不稳定性。改变这一体系的努力正在展开,但尽管替代疗法从业者自身越来越多地组织起来寻求国家认可,替代疗法却占据着一个不确定的政策空间:国家并未将其完全视为一个社会和政策问题,它处于医学与灵性之间的边缘位置,这“扰乱”了共和制下科学理性和世俗主义的理想。本文探讨了法律、科学和医学交叉点上的一些紧张关系。它思考了为何围绕相关监管问题的紧张关系似乎持续存在,并表明前进的道路可能取决于不再将科学作为划分监管中合法与非法护理界限的唯一仲裁者。