A) For the case considered inexcusable delay in sending an ambulance without medical personnel also and unable to provide the necessary early treatment and symptoms requiring grave-like heart failure that caused the death of the patient, give rise to liability of the administration, as is the assumption that since the first call until the ambulance arrived an hour had passed five minutes when breathing problems serious bleeding and heart problems have designated priority and require a mobile ICU and not a single ambulance, facts that are responsible for health services from the 112.
B) With respect to liability arising from a medical intervention, the basic criterion used is that of the Lex Artis, so that the professional obligation of medicine is media rather than results: the physician's obligation is to provide appropriate assistance and not to guarantee, in any case, healing the sick. Therefore, the Lex Artis is the performance parameter that enables health professionals to assess the correctness of medical acts, imposing the professional duty to act in accordance with due diligence. This approach is essential when defining the responsibility in this area, requiring for their existence, not only the injury but also the breach of that Lex Artis. The injury itself can be incurred excessive objectification of responsibility. It is worth citing the ruling of the Sixth Section of the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court of November 27, 2000, which is recalled: "The scientific, technical or experimental or medicine or probably in any sector of human activity, can ensure a hundred percent a particular result. The absolute certainty to be considered as excluded in advance. "
C) It should be noted that the medical obligation, medicine or curative care, as repeatedly stressed by the Supreme Court doctrine known, is an obligation of means and, in this case were not made available to the patient all available means to your attention because it is not sent on time the ambulance had have been submitted at an earlier time. Indeed, it is impossible to predict what would have been the outcome if the ambulance had been sent on time, but what is undoubted is that the patient had more chances to save his life.
As stated in the STS of October 30, 1999, FJ 4, "... By having demonstrated that the operation of the health service, although not an obvious negligence concur ... was wrong ... it imposed in accordance with sound criticism, the conclusion that it (the injury) responds to the inadequate assistance provided by the health institution, no ... is required of applicants indubitable proof of incorrect causal link between medical practice and ... (The injury), when they have sufficiently established a series of facts and circumstances that allow the issuing judge with a high degree of success, his view on the existence of the necessary causal link between the conduct of public service and the injury suffered. ... In a similar way to pronounce the STS of October 18, 2005.
And there is a deficient or abnormal provision of medical service ambulances 112 if it is proved the absence of medical staff that should be equipped ambulance reanimatoria UVI and medication, and therefore gives a dubious attention and effectiveness of care provided by the doctor not to drive the usual or normal means that the lex artis resuscitation medical exile and determining the initiation of appropriate disciplinary inquiry into the voluntary dismissal ended by having reached that early retirement due to permanent disability.
.
0 comments:
Post a Comment