Hastings Cent Rep. 2021 May;51(3):5-7. doi: 10.1002/hast.1255.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, as resources dwindled, clinicians, health care institutions, and policymakers have expressed concern about potential legal liability for following crisis standards of care (CSC) plans. Although there is no robust empirical research to demonstrate that liability protections actually influence physician behavior, we argue that limited liability protections for health care professionals who follow established CSC plans may instead be justified by reliance on the principle of reciprocity. Expecting physicians to do something they know will harm their patients causes moral distress and suffering that may leave lasting scars. Limited liability shields are both appropriate and proportionate to the risk physicians are being asked to take in such circumstances. Under certain narrow circumstances, it remains unclear that the standard of care is sufficiently flexible to protect physicians from liability. Given this uncertainty, the likelihood that physicians would be sued for such an act, and their desire for such immunity, this limited protection is morally legitimate.
在新冠疫情期间,随着资源的减少,临床医生、医疗机构和政策制定者对遵循危机标准的护理 (CSC) 计划可能产生的法律责任表示担忧。虽然没有强有力的实证研究表明责任保护实际上会影响医生的行为,但我们认为,对于遵循既定 CSC 计划的医疗保健专业人员,有限的责任保护可能可以通过对互惠原则的依赖来证明其合理性。期望医生做一些他们知道会伤害患者的事情会导致道德困境和痛苦,这种痛苦可能会留下持久的创伤。在这种情况下,有限的责任保护是适当和相称的,因为医生要承担一定的风险。在某些狭窄的情况下,尚不清楚护理标准是否足够灵活,可以保护医生免受责任追究。考虑到这种不确定性,医生因这种行为而被起诉的可能性以及他们对这种豁免的渴望,这种有限的保护在道德上是合理的。