Biomedical subjects

J Dufková

Publications and source records attributed to J Dufková.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2000

[Civil and criminal laws regarding the donation, removal and transfer of organs (Transplantation Law) in Germany with respect to administrative and clinical autopsies].

In the Federal Republic of Germany, transplantation medicine, which is relatively young and still developing, is now regulated by the law governing the donation, removal and transfer of organs (Transplantation Law--TPG) of 05. 11. 1997 and has been given a legal basis which satisfies even present-day standards. By evaluating the highly personal rights to potential organ donor and of his next-of-kin against the interests of maintaining life and health of others, the law works along the lines of the so-called extended consent solution. The basic civil law stipulations of sections 3 + 4 TPG, while protecting the donor's individual freedom of decision, give his next-of-kin or trusted confidant at or immediately following death the right to communicate his presumes wishes. In addition, it must be stated that through recent decisions handed down by the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) in response to various complaints, this regulation has been recognised as conforming to constitutional laws. The basic content of the penal regulations states that violations of civil law rules and trafficking in organs are an offence. Current disclosed requirements for suitable donor organs, in particular for 1998, make it appear likely that the current deficit can be eliminated by the introduction of the organisational measures contained in the law. In conclusion, the situation with regard to autopsy should be addressed since, in contrast to the federal transplantation law which applies to all states, autopsy is regulated differently and, from a legal-political standpoint, unsatisfactorily by each individual state. It is desirable that this legal ambiguity be corrected by standardising the inconsistent and at times non-existent legal stipulations.

Autopsy↗

PubMed1997

[Questions from a medico-legal viewpoint on the planned law dealing with removal and transfer of organs (transplantation law) in West Germany].

Within the framework of the planned law concerning the removal and transfer of organs (transplantation law) in the Federal Republic of Germany, and taking as a basis the draft of a prototype law by the federal states dated February 1st 1994 and the draft bill of the states of Bremen and Hessen dated June 30th 1994, the speech addresses itself primarily to the question of whether, when no consent of the decreased can be identified, and when the next-of-kin have been informed by the doctor in attendance and given an appropriate time-limit, the next-of-kin in order of succession or any close relative can object to organ removal for the purpose of transplant surgery. Because of the highly personal nature of the postmortal personal rights transferred to the next-of-kin as well as their custodial rights, and with regard to the particularly sensitive nature of this decision, it is suggested that the next-of-kin be informed not only of their right of refusal but also-in view of their responsibility toward other relatives-be instructed on the meaning, substance and legal consequences of such a refusal. It is furthermore suggested that sufficient organs could be obtained by organisational measures such as requests to driving licence applicants, which would lead to a higher preparedness to donate organs, while, at the same time, sparing the next-of-kin unnecessary emotional pain. From a medical point of view, it should be recognised that the complete and irreversible loss of all brain functions, in spite of artificially maintained heart and circulatory functions, is a sure sign of death. In closing, it is pointed out that a change to the currently valid [symbol: see text] 168 StGB would mean that a violation of the right of refusal could lead to criminal prosecution.

Germany, West↗

PubMed1992

[The independence of the forensic physician as an expert witness].

Forensic physicians are often called upon by the courts and the public prosecutor's office to give expert opinions and carry out post-mortem examinations, e.g. to determine blood groups or cause of death. The expert is simply aiding the court within the framework of its function of hearing evidence. The court, after considering the evidence, must determine whether an allegation is true or false. Since, for example, the determination of cause of death demands qualified specialized knowledge and a high sense of responsibility, the expert should be both scientifically and personally autonomous in order to preclude wherever possible any conflict of interest. The not-too-distant past has demonstrated that justice, even here, can often be miscarried. This is why the autonomy of the expert is of prime importance. The readjustment to section 87, para. 2, clause 2, StPO may represent an infringement of the principle of autonomy, for in addition to calling on forensic physicians or the heads of forensic or pathology institutes to perform autopsies, as required before the 1975 amendment, these heads are now permitted to delegate their assignments to doctors in their own institutes. In compliance with the decisive trial commentary Loewe-Rosenberg, it should be pointed out that the presence of two pathologists is required by the law, one of whom must be a forensic physician or head of a forensic or pathology institute, and that the court presumes that the participation of delegated doctors will be the exception to the rule.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Autopsy↗

PubMed1991

[Genetic techniques--chances--risks--limits (from the viewpoint of the legislator--ethical questions--status of medical research].

Gene technology is still a very young area of research. Advantages or disadvantages of this development cannot be tangibly predicted. Irrational desires and fears have surfaced resulting from the fact that we are now in a position of cultivate certain biological characteristics hitherto impossible to reproduce. Individual cases of genome analysis under working conditions, genome analysis as a genetic fingerprint, outdoor plant experiments and gene testing procedures in prenatal diagnoses should all be considered. Analysis uncertainty exists in all these fields, not least caused by multifunctional factors affecting genetic features. The question regarding the right to know or not to know, and the data protection problem irrevocably connected to this, is constantly being raised. It must be recorded that, in spite of the latest scientific findings, opportunities for therapy are frequently lacking. In all our efforts, the psychological conflicts of those concerned and the resulting socio-economic consequences must be taken into consideration.

Ethics, Medical↗

PubMed1990

[Autopsy technique and basic legal aspects of autopsy].

Dissection techniques and questions regarding the laws governing autopsy. Autopsy techniques vary. Hamperl's methods, in my opinion, best fulfil the demands of pathology as well as of forensic medicine. In order to obtain more conclusive findings, the dissection of internal organs in several so-called packages, e.g. throat and chest organs and kidneys in the urogenital system, is preferable. Severance of the heart as a means of achieving bloodlessness (Blutleere) should be tolerated only in isolated cases. Some comments on hygienic working methods are in order, not least because of frequent violations in this area. The dignity of the deceased demands hygienic conditions and that the external appearance of the body be reestablished. The removed organs should be returned to the body for burial. Burial should not be used as a means of waste disposal for the institute. The most common and well-known autopsy cases are also dealt with: legal and administrative autopsy. Only forensic autopsy is governed by Para. 87 StPO, albeit incompletely. The definition of the medical examiner is difficult. According to the law on the standardization in Public Health dated 3. 7. 1934 (RGBl. I., p. 531), these tasks should come under the jurisdiction of the health authorities. Since these are not in a position, either from a personnel or material standpoint, to assume these tasks, it is customary, as is the case in the Frankfurt area, for a service contract to be concluded with the director of the institute for forensic medicine. This solution harbours two dangers.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Autopsy↗

PubMed1989

[Forensic medicine aspects of surrogate mothers and artificial insemination].

Artificial insemination solves the problem of childlessness in a way never before thought possible. There is now often a lack of guiding principles in law, and new ethical questions have arisen. It would appear that homologous insemination is the simplest. This is recognized by the church; by doctors, even for unmarried couples. Heterological insemination, on the other hand, is only rarely acceptable to married couples, and then subject to the limits of generation, the avoidance of half-brothers and sisters, and gamete mistakes, as well as any commercialization. The medical standpoint and other legal developments must be reconciled with these factors; particularly the possibility of cancelling the anonymity of the sperm donor and the right to appeal of the social father. As a general principle, the ruling premise should be to place the burden of risk on the parents. With in-vitro fertilization, the existence of surplus embryos is particularly problematic. It is becoming more and more common to regard life as commencing in the zygote and not in the nidation. Can the scientific experiments permitted under the new professional regulations-even with more complicated requirements-be reconciled with this? Consensus can be reached in rejecting surrogate motherhood, since the danger of commercialization is too great, and propagation possibilities are being opened up which, to our present understanding, are irresponsible.

Expert Testimony↗

PubMed1988