Is it the illegal activities to walk and treat and cure promptly in disqualification?

Is it the illegal activities to walk and treat and cure promptly in disqualification?
Is it the illegal activities to walk and treat and cure promptly in disqualification?
Last this column it publishes to be " practise medicine or urgent danger prevention illegally ", author think the party's behavior the urgent danger prevention in the case, some reader friends have different views on this kind of view, think that should belong to and practise medicine illegally according to the legal provision. What a behavior of treatment and cure thought about under medical worker's emergency, please express an opinion. --Editor Zhang Wei The case is returned The old barefoot doctor rescues people and gets into the dispute Some of forest was once " Barefoot doctor " . In recent years, because forest some is too old to work up the farm work, take up one's old trade again again. To some behaviors of illegal practice of medicine of forest, after the county hospital make administrative penalty twice, no longer practise medicine in forest some. One evening, ate and blocked with a 12 -year-old boy in the village in the trachea, the life hung by a hair. Its family implore forest some to treat and cure. Comes to the scene closely if some of forest considers rescuing persons, see children breathe, the heartbeat already stop, then implement the tracheostomy operation. The child's life has been kept, but presented half-lengthly and is paralysed, and then it is regarded as the improper result that causes of tracheostomy to check by the hospital. This case is tried by the court, it is the urgent danger prevention to think some medical behaviors of forest, not forming the crime, it is innocent to adjudge forest some. (the details please see 10 Japan editions of February of 2009) As to the thing that the treating and curing the behavior promptly of some of forest of this case, court and original text author all think it is the urgent danger prevention. But the author thinks, this behavior forms legally and practises medicine illegally. The provision of " management rule that the rural doctor obtains employment " according to our country, our country implements the registered system of the rural doctor's operation, the health authorities in the county are responsible for the rural doctor's management in the area. Article 15 of this regulation stipulates: "The rural doctor can be employing the medical health organ of village of its operation to be engaged in preventing, health care and general medical care after registering and obtaining the practising certificate. Ones that are not registered and obtained rural doctor's practising certificate, do not get the operation. " This has not been defined to doctor's qualification, personnel not registering and not serving in the medical organization of the village, can not take up a job as a doctor without authorization, otherwise practise medicine illegally. Have acted as forest some in this case " Barefoot doctor " ,Hold the last stakes and walks and has not made legal qualification either again, moreover, he practises medicine the behavior successively received administrative penalty twice. In this case, he practises medicine and causes the victim's serious consequence again, behavior its belong to, practise medicine illegally undoubtedly, commit, practise medicine crime illegally already. In addition, it is not so obvious whether this case has indication of implementing tracheostomy, know a little about a bit medical knowledge but speech only on some forest, competent at " the tracheostomy " absolutely The operation. The tracheostomy operation that is implemented in this case, though belong to the first aid measure under the emergency, but must be finished by the surgeon that have qualification and specially train. That is to say, it is not what any doctor can operate that should perform the operation in this. I am a neurosurgeon who has taken up a job as a doctor for many years, to not doing regular tracheostomy, and take out foreign matter from the trachea, and because tracheostomy causes patient's half-length situation of paralysing etc., not merely feel that wonders very much, even unable to understand this " operation " With " paralysed " Between yes some directness relation. Because except that some forest practise medicine behavior break the law, the intersection of this case and until " whether infant half-length to paralysed, result from not implementing improper tracheostomy " institute of traditional Chinese medicine Diagnosis, it is what have no scientific basis. I think, some behaviors of middle forest of this case can be regarded as " urgent danger prevention " ,But still belong to and practise medicine illegally. The two are not contradictory. The former belongs to the range of the aspect of morals, the latter belongs to the category of the legal aspect. As the two present opposite time, the morals behavior must accord with the current legal provision. Because of the explanation or modification of the law, must be had the final say by the legislative body or department, anyone and organization does not have this right. Just as capital take place once the intersection of lying-in woman and relative refuse, sign operation, cause the intersection of lying-in woman and incident of death, the media criticizes the behavior of the hospital from aspect of morals, but the hospital insists on the attitude that acts in accordance with the law, not only has safeguarded one's own legitimate rights and interests also impel the society to think the law improves the question. Because of this, as to the situation of this case, I think it is wrong that some behaviors have not broken the law in the judgement forest of the court. Behavior that should practise medicine illegally how measurement of penalty another matter, can't lump together. (Author's unit: North China coal teaching hospital of medical college)


|