300 KB26 KB201320252014Ambrož, Matjažletnik:40številka:6/7str. 905-913ISSN:0353-6521COBISSID:14003537URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-FAYJ6TFPslIUS SOFTWAREPodjetje in delohealth carekazniva dejanjaobjektivna odgovornostodgovornostzdravstvoProblem vzročnosti pri kaznivih dejanjih v medicini|There are cases in the court where experts are not able to give clear answers or evade answering by referring to scientific uncertainty. The court, however, has no such resort, it must decide. In medical negligence cases limitations of scientific knowledge are still extensive, mostly there will be a problem with uncertain causation. Was it the doctor's failure that caused the death of the patient? Or perhaps the patient would have died anyway, even if the doctor did everything right? The author elaborates cases, where there is no doubt that the doctor made a mistake, however, even with proper treatment the death of the patient cannot be excluded. He confronts two main approaches, known from case-law and scholarly literature: in dubio pro reo principle and increase of risk (loss of chance) principle. Pros and cons of both approaches are elaboratedIz sodne prakse so znani primeri, v katerih izvedenci zaradi spoznavnih omejitev ne morejo dati decidiranih odgovorov na nekatera od zastavljenih vprašanj. Sodišče tega izhoda nima, temveč mora odločiti. V primeru medicinskih kaznivih dejanj bodo spoznavne težave pogosto povezane z vprašanjem vzročnosti. Je oškodovančevo smrt povzročila zdravnikova napaka ali pa ga tudi ustrezna medicinska intervencija ne bi mogla več rešiti? Avtor analizira zadeve, v katerih sicer ni dvoma, da je zdravnik napravil napako, vendarle pa ni jasno, ali bi ustrezno ravnanje bolnika sploh lahko rešilo. Sooči dva različna pristopa, ki ju srečamo v literaturi in sodni praksi, sklicevanje na načelo in dubio pro reo in teorijo o povečanju tveganja, ter analizira prednosti in slabosti vsakega od njijuTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia