• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

公民陪审团、流动民主与澳大利亚机动车事故伤害赔偿强制保险计划的立法改革

Citizens' Juries, Liquid Democracy and Legislative Reform of Australian Compulsory Insurance Schemes for Injury Compensation after Motor Vehicle Accidents.

作者信息

Blumer Felix, Gedik Talia, Faunce Thomas

机构信息

Blumers Personal Injury Lawyers.

Professor, ANU Law School and Medical School (joint appointment).

出版信息

J Law Med. 2019 Apr;26(3):571-582.

PMID:30958650
Abstract

In 2017/2018 the Australian Capital Territory held its first citizens' jury to deliberate changes to the Territory's Compulsory Third Party (CTP) insurance scheme, for injury compensation after motor vehicle accidents. Such citizens' juries were designed to aid the transition to next-generation parliamentary processes (such as liquid democracy - citizen direct electronic voting on laws or individual transfer of their vote to respected politicians) by enabling a variety of key stakeholders and interests to be actively represented in the process of statutory development. In effect such a process is a democratic alternative to the current model of corporate lobbyists covertly influencing the legislative process. This column investigates how the citizens' jury chose one from four proposed CTP models. It then critiques how, following the jury's recommendation, the Australian Capital Territory Government introduced the Motor Accidents Injuries Bill 2018 (ACT). Once enacted, this is designed to create a "no-fault" expedited scheme, but on our analysis, at the cost of certain adverse outcomes. These include greatly reducing an injured person's entitlements to fair compensation, a "whole person impairment threshold" that limits entitlements to treatment and care, wage loss and compensation for pain and suffering, removing the right to compensation for gratuitous care, and giving the insurance companies unfettered power over the provision of entitlements.

摘要

2017/2018年,澳大利亚首都地区举行了首次公民陪审团,以审议该地区机动车事故后伤害赔偿的第三方强制保险(CTP)计划的变更。此类公民陪审团旨在通过使各种关键利益相关者和利益群体在法规制定过程中得到积极代表,来助力向新一代议会程序(如流动民主——公民对法律进行直接电子投票或个人将其投票权转让给受尊敬的政治家)的过渡。实际上,这样一个过程是当前企业游说者暗中影响立法过程模式的民主替代方案。本专栏调查了公民陪审团如何从四个提议的CTP模式中选择其一。然后,本专栏批评了在陪审团提出建议后,澳大利亚首都地区政府如何出台《2018年机动车事故伤害法案》(澳大利亚首都地区)。一旦颁布,该法案旨在创建一个“无过错”的快速计划,但根据我们的分析,这是以某些不利结果为代价的。这些不利结果包括大幅减少受伤人员获得公平赔偿的权利、一个限制治疗和护理权利、工资损失以及痛苦和折磨赔偿的“全身损伤阈值”、取消无偿护理赔偿权,以及赋予保险公司在提供权利方面不受限制的权力。

相似文献

1
Citizens' Juries, Liquid Democracy and Legislative Reform of Australian Compulsory Insurance Schemes for Injury Compensation after Motor Vehicle Accidents.公民陪审团、流动民主与澳大利亚机动车事故伤害赔偿强制保险计划的立法改革
J Law Med. 2019 Apr;26(3):571-582.
2
The use of citizens' juries in health policy decision-making: a systematic review.公民陪审团在卫生政策决策中的应用:系统评价。
Soc Sci Med. 2014 May;109:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.005. Epub 2014 Mar 6.
3
A citizens' jury on regulation of McDonald's products and operations in Australia in response to a corporate health impact assessment.澳大利亚针对麦当劳产品和运营的监管开展公民陪审团活动,以回应企业对健康影响的评估。
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2018 Apr;42(2):133-139. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12769. Epub 2018 Jan 31.
4
Public Engagement through Inclusive Deliberation: The Human Genome International Commission and Citizens' Juries.公众参与包容性审议:人类基因组国际委员会和公民陪审团。
Am J Bioeth. 2023 Dec;23(12):66-76. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2022.2146786. Epub 2022 Dec 7.
5
Evaluating the use of citizens' juries in food policy: a case study of food regulation.评估公民陪审团在食品政策中的使用:以食品监管为例。
BMC Public Health. 2013 Jun 19;13:596. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-596.
6
Assessing the impact of deliberative processes on the views of participants: is it 'in one ear and out the other'?评估审议过程对参与者观点的影响:是“一听了之”吗?
Health Expect. 2014 Apr;17(2):278-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00749.x. Epub 2012 Feb 2.
7
Do consumer voices in health-care citizens' juries matter?医疗保健公民陪审团中的消费者声音重要吗?
Health Expect. 2016 Oct;19(5):1015-22. doi: 10.1111/hex.12397. Epub 2015 Sep 28.
8
From passive subject to active agent: the potential of Citizens' Juries for nursing research.从被动参与者到积极推动者:公民陪审团在护理研究中的潜力。
Nurse Educ Today. 2007 Oct;27(7):788-95. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2006.10.012. Epub 2006 Dec 8.
9
Choices without reasons: citizens' juries and policy evaluation.无理由的选择:公民陪审团与政策评估
J Med Ethics. 2000 Aug;26(4):272-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.26.4.272.
10
Recommendations from Two Citizens' Juries on the Surgical Management of Obesity.公民陪审团对肥胖症手术治疗的建议。
Obes Surg. 2018 Jun;28(6):1745-1752. doi: 10.1007/s11695-017-3089-4.