本文選題：錯誤出生 + 錯誤生命　； 參考：《吉林大學》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：“錯誤出生”之訴是指提供產(chǎn)檢等相關服務的醫(yī)療機構及其醫(yī)務人員未盡其高度注意義務,沒有檢查或診斷出胎兒的缺陷或未盡如實告知等法定義務,致使父母誤以為胎兒健康而將其生下后,自己作為原告或所生缺陷兒作為原告向醫(yī)療機構請求損害賠償?shù)脑V訟。近些年,此類案件在我國時有發(fā)生,因法律缺乏明確規(guī)定,常出現(xiàn)審理標準不一致、審判結果不統(tǒng)一等現(xiàn)象,其爭議主要體現(xiàn)在侵權損害賠償?shù)呢熑螛嫵伞⒄埱髾嘀黧w以及損害賠償?shù)姆秶确矫�。“錯誤出生”之侵權損害賠償責任的成立同樣需滿足侵權法上一般侵權責任構成的四要件。在“錯誤出生”案件中,因醫(yī)務人員違反法定義務的不作為行為體現(xiàn)了違法性,該違法行為侵害了父母的生育知情選擇權,使其喪失終止妊娠的機會以致帶來了財產(chǎn)利益與非財產(chǎn)利益的損失,二者之間可謂具有相當因果關系。同時,一般醫(yī)療侵權案件的歸責原則是過錯責任原則,故在“錯誤出生”之侵權損害賠償責任下,也要考察其過錯,即要結合當時的醫(yī)療水平來判定其是否違反了高度注意義務。當上述各要件完全滿足時,即構成“錯誤出生”之侵權損害賠償責任。在“錯誤出生”案件中,誰得向醫(yī)療機構請求侵權損害賠償,仍頗有爭議。目前,大部分地區(qū)及國家均肯定父母的適格請求權主體地位:一方面,無論是基于侵權還是基于違約,母親均是適格的請求權主體;另一方面,同樣作為生育知情選擇權的享有者的父親,也可就其權利受損的事實提起侵權之訴。分歧主要體現(xiàn)在孩子可否作為請求權主體的問題上。孩子雖然可就其在胎兒期間所遭受的人身利益損害有所主張,但在此類案件中,對孩子而言,其未遭受到任何損害,而且孩子作為損害賠償金的直接利益承受者,不承認其請求權也并不違背公平正義。故孩子不是適格的請求權主體。父母可就哪些費用提出請求,即損害賠償范圍的問題,亦存在多種審判結果。根據(jù)責任承擔的因果關系理論,應予賠償?shù)呢敭a(chǎn)性損害包括母親的醫(yī)療費用、缺陷兒的撫養(yǎng)費用,包括一般撫養(yǎng)費與特殊撫養(yǎng)費。對于比較特殊的殘疾賠償金,則因孩子的殘疾是先天性的,非過失醫(yī)療行為所致,而不予賠償。同時,缺陷兒的出生非為父母所期待,其“錯誤”出生定會給父母帶來心靈的打擊,在侵犯父母生育知情選擇權這一人身權益下,精神痛苦可謂達到嚴重程度,故當事人亦可請求精神損害賠償。但在具體個案中,還應結合具體案情及原因力等規(guī)則,公平合理地對侵權損害賠償?shù)呢熑畏秶右源_定及限制。
[Abstract]:"false birth" complaint refers to the legal obligation of medical institutions and their medical personnel who provide services related to birth inspection and other services to fail to fulfill their high duty of care, to examine or diagnose the defects of the fetus or to inform them truthfully. Cause the parents to mistake the fetus for health and give birth to it, as a plaintiff or a defective child as a plaintiff to claim damages to a medical institution. In recent years, such cases occur from time to time in our country, due to the lack of clear provisions of the law, the trial standards are often inconsistent, the trial results are not uniform and so on. The dispute is mainly reflected in the liability structure of tort damages. The subject of claim and the scope of damages. The establishment of tort damages liability of "wrong birth" also needs to satisfy the four elements of general tort liability in tort law. In the case of "wrong birth", the omission of medical personnel in violation of their legal obligations reflects the illegality, which infringes on the parents' informed choice of birth. The loss of the chance of termination of pregnancy leads to the loss of both property and non-property interests, which has a considerable causal relationship. At the same time, the principle of imputation in general medical tort cases is the principle of fault liability. That is to consider the level of medical care at that time to determine whether it violated the high duty of care. When the above-mentioned requirements are fully satisfied, the liability for tort damages is constituted by "wrong birth". In the case of false birth, it is still controversial who should seek damages for infringement from medical institutions. At present, most regions and countries affirm the status of parents' right to claim: on the one hand, whether based on infringement or breach of contract, mother is the subject of eligible claim; on the other hand, The father, who is also the holder of informed reproductive choice, may sue for infringement of the fact that his rights are impaired. The difference is mainly reflected in whether the child can be the subject of claim. Although the child may claim harm to his personal interests during his or her foetal period, in such cases no harm has been suffered to the child, and the child is the direct beneficiary of the damages, Not recognizing its right of claim is not contrary to fairness and justice. Therefore, the child is not the subject of appropriate claim. The question of what costs parents may request, i.e. the scope of damages, has been subject to multiple trial outcomes. According to the theory of causality of liability, compensation for property damage includes medical expenses of mother, maintenance of defective children, including general alimony and special maintenance. For special disability compensation, due to the child's disability is congenital, non-negligent medical behavior, and not compensation. At the same time, the birth of a defective child is not expected by the parents, and its "wrong" birth will certainly bring a blow to the heart of the parents. In violation of the personal rights and interests of the parents' informed choice of birth, the mental pain can be said to have reached a serious degree. Therefore, the party concerned may also claim compensation for moral damage. However, in specific cases, the scope of liability for tort damages should be determined and limited in a fair and reasonable way, combining with the rules of specific circumstances and reasons.
【學位授予單位】：吉林大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D923

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 安玉萍;論行政調(diào)解在商標侵權損害賠償中的適用[J];甘肅政法成人教育學院學報;2002年04期

2 張維迎;作為激勵機制的法律——評《侵權損害賠償?shù)慕?jīng)濟分析》[J];中國人民大學學報;2003年02期

3 孫雨生;略論農(nóng)機產(chǎn)品質量問題引發(fā)的侵權損害賠償(下)[J];山東農(nóng)機化;2004年01期

4 曾惠芬;航道侵權損害賠償[J];中國船檢;2004年11期

5 鄭妙;郝維青;;對完善商標侵權損害賠償制度的幾點思考[J];企業(yè)家天地下半月刊(理論版);2007年02期

6 肖青山;;侵權損害賠償?shù)墓δ芴轿鯷J];法制與社會;2008年09期

7 張星;;作為激勵機制的侵權損害賠償制度——評王成的《侵權損害賠償?shù)慕?jīng)濟分析》[J];法制與社會;2009年18期

8 沈劉燕婧;周伯煌;;我國婚內(nèi)侵權損害賠償制度之構建[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(下旬);2012年12期

9 何普;;食品大規(guī)模侵權損害賠償體系的構建——以損害救濟的社會化為中心[J];中國地質大學學報(社會科學版);2013年S1期

10 劉書，

本文編號：1949932