Ulsenheimer K
Rechtsanwaltsbüro Weinberger, Sottung und Kollegen, München.
Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 1998 Oct;92(8-9):548-54.
Withholding therapy may cause a charge of manslaughter and the intended withdrawal of therapy may result in proceedings because of second-degree murder, requested homicide and omission of help, respectively. According to the criminal law, negligence of the duty to help does not require a guarantor position of the physician but the intent for punishableness. Otherwise, the physician is liable for negligence only if he holds a guarantor position for the protection of the patient's life and health. The facts of manslaughter require the violation of medical care which is not equal to the violation of common or mostly acknowledged rules of medical science. Another requirement for liability is causality. Thus, is has to be proven without doubt that the patient's death would have been avoided if the omitted therapy had been applied. The legal requirements on the principle of causality are high. Therefore, negligence can be proven in many cases but the proof of causality does not succeed and the charges have to be dropped. In such a case, it is totally wrong to attempt a charge of omission of help since the criminal law requires intent and is not a collector for neglected medical procedures.
停止治疗可能会导致过失杀人的指控,而有意停止治疗可能分别因二级谋杀、故意杀人及不作为帮助而引发诉讼程序。根据刑法,帮助义务的疏忽并不要求医生处于保证人地位,而是要求有可罚性意图。否则,只有当医生处于保护患者生命和健康的保证人地位时,才对过失负责。过失杀人的事实要求违反医疗护理,这并不等同于违反医学的普遍或大多数公认规则。责任的另一个要求是因果关系。因此,必须毫无疑问地证明,如果实施了被省略的治疗,患者的死亡本可避免。法律对因果关系原则的要求很高。所以,在许多情况下可以证明存在过失,但因果关系的证明却无法成功,指控不得不撤销。在这种情况下,试图指控不作为帮助是完全错误的,因为刑法要求有意图,且不是被忽视医疗程序的收容所。