PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

H Franzki

Publications and source records attributed to H Franzki.

13 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1996

[Development of expert assessment in the malpractice lawsuit from the viewpoint of the judge].

The expert testimony in medical malpractice suits is being criticized until today. The most important objection: The medical experts do not obey their duty to be impartial; they are reluctant to testify against their colleagues regardless of the merits of the plaintiffs' case. But owing to ignorance they often violate further duties they have to comply with as experts, too. The medical profession in the past neglected the instruction-of physicians, who act as experts in malpractice cases. But judges are also responsible for the situation: Not in all cases they do pay enough attention to the selection, instruction and questioning of the medical expert. Many mistakes made in the field of expert testimony meanwhile are recognized and eliminated. Nevertheless seminars for the further instruction of physicians and lawyers are urgently necessary in order to improve the medical expert testimony.

Criminal Law↗
PubMed1995

[Liability in failed sterilization from the legal viewpoint].

If a sterilization does not succeed and leads to the unintended birth of a child and if this is due to the physician's negligence, he has to compensate the parents' cost of maintenance for the child. This is a legal rule which has been developed and reaffirmed in several decisions of the German Federal Court (Bundesgerichtshof). Unexpected and without connexion with the real matter of the case which had to be decided the German Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) has criticized this legal doctrine in its decision on to the reform of the law of abortion. In the opinions of the court the rule has to be revised, because it is a violation of the child's dignity as a human being to regard its (wrongful) existence as a source of damage. However this part of the decision can only be understood as a obiter dictum which is not finding the Federal Court. Therefore it is not to be expected that the civil courts will undertake any substantial change of the rule laid down at the outset.

Female↗
PubMed1992

[Intensive care for geriatric patients--legal problems].

Treatment of the geriatric patient in the intensive care unit always requires the prior permission of the patient, whose ability to give this must be carefully examined. If the patient is no longer able to do this, a social worker has to act for him/her. This person is appointed by the guardianship court and can agree to risky treatment on the patient's behalf only with the permission of the court. This also applies equally to measures that will constrain the patient's freedom. Only in the case of an emergency may the physician act immediately. The question as to terminating treatment and the considerable need of the will of the patient to do so is discussed. The importance of correct documentation is particularly emphasized.

Aged↗
PubMed1991

[Physician's disclosure form a legal viewpoint].

Concerning the physician's duty to disclose information, it has to be distinguished between the information of the diagnosis, the therapeutical instructions on the patient's behaviour and the disclosure of the risks incidental to the treatment. Practically the last-mentioned is the most important, because the effectiveness of the patient's consent depends on its performance. In case the physician violates this duty, he is liable for battery, even if the medical procedure is performed skillfully. The modes of disclosure and its omission for therapeutical reasons are discussed.

Austria↗
PubMed1990

[Medical malpractice in relation to its social political importance].

Despite an unchanged legal basis the number of proceedings concerning medical practitioner's liability has increased substantially and medical law has developed into an independent field of law in the last 20 years. On one hand this is a result of modern medicine's extended possibilities to act and control, on the other hand it is caused by the patient's changed attitude towards both, his disease and his physician. Hereby the mass media exercise considerable influence with their commentaries, that are often exaggerated in their criticism and their representation. But this development gives no rise to concern. The jurisdiction in the field of medical practitioner's liability is--apart from a few exceptions--not overstated but necessary for the safeguarding of the patient's interests. It doesn't impede progress, doesn't give cause for a defensive medicine and doesn't burden our public health system. For the patient's wellbeing it often even accomplishes the important function of convincing the public health administration, that sometimes shows a tendency to act economically, of strict medical demands. There still is no room for the general conclusion, that the control of medicine by jurisdiction has undermined the confidential relationship between patient and physician. The recently published result of an opinion poll has shown, that physicians still enjoy a high reputation, while journalists--in spite of some contradictory statements--find themselves in the last ranks.

Germany, West↗