연명치료중단의 요건과 정당화
Terms and justification for suspension of Life sustaining treatment
1
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Treatment performed by doctor means actions to improve and restore patient’s health. But life-sustaining treatment does not improve and restore patient’s health, but is performed only on a sole purpose, to extend patient’s life, and many questions have been brought up whether to permit it or not. Currently, as we can see in foreign cases and domestic cases, it seems that a social agreement on permission to cease life-sustaining treatment is established. Cessation of life-sustaining treatment is permitted only on those who are unrecoverable and have reached near death when any treatments are meaningless, and to judge it has to consider overall meaning of life regarding social and economical aspects of patient and his/her family, not just simple numbers. And a council including the patient’s medical attendant must decide it, and since it deals with life, it is considered just for court to decide once more whether the decision of the council is right. Also, only when these conditions are met, we see that the cessation of life-sustaining treatment can be justified by ruling out illegitimacy through socially established regulations. In regard of ceasing life-sustaining treatment, medical communities are criticizing that our law is too passive, makes judgement too much carefully, and violates autonomy of the medical communities. But our law is the last bastion that can prevent abuse of cessation of life-sustaining treatment, and we think it contradicts our spirit to protect a person’s life to carry out that role carelessly.
Abstract
Treatment performed by doctor means actions to improve and restore patient’s health. But life-sustaining treatment does not improve and restore patient’s health, but is performed only on a sole purpose, to extend patient’s life, and many questions have been brought up whether to permit it or not. Currently, as we can see in foreign cases and domestic cases, it seems that a social agreement on permission to cease life-sustaining treatment is established. Cessation of life-sustaining treatment is permitted only on those who are unrecoverable and have reached near death when any treatments are meaningless, and to judge it has to consider overall meaning of life regarding social and economical aspects of patient and his/her family, not just simple numbers. And a council including the patient’s medical attendant must decide it, and since it deals with life, it is considered just for court to decide once more whether the decision of the council is right. Also, only when these conditions are met, we see that the cessation of life-sustaining treatment can be justified by ruling out illegitimacy through socially established regulations. In regard of ceasing life-sustaining treatment, medical communities are criticizing that our law is too passive, makes judgement too much carefully, and violates autonomy of the medical communities. But our law is the last bastion that can prevent abuse of cessation of life-sustaining treatment, and we think it contradicts our spirit to protect a person’s life to carry out that role carelessly.
참고문헌 (41)
- 김성돈, "형법상 작위와 부작위의 구별", 성균관법학, 14(1) (2002), 성균관대학교
- 김일수, "안락사 문제의 실정법적 연구", 현대사회, 4(1) (1984), 현대사회연구소
- 김재경, "부작위로서의 연명치료중단행위", 박사, pp.2010
- 김재경, "형법상 작위와 부작위의 구별", 원광법학, 25(1), pp.273~292 (2009), 법학연구소
- 김재윤, "안락사 허용론에 대한 고찰", 형사법연구, (26), pp.597~614 (2006), 한국형사법학회
- 김진경, "연명치료중단 결정에서 의학적 무의미함(medical futility)", 한국의료윤리학회지, 13(2), pp.123~136 (2010), 한국의료윤리학회
- 김용욱, "형법상 생명보호원칙과 치료중단", 의료법학, 3(1) (2002), 대한의료법학회
- 김혁돈, "환자의 자기결정권과 치료중단", 형사법연구, (25), pp.113~138 (2006), 한국형사법학회
- 노동일, "헌법상 연명치료중단에 관한 자기결정권 입론의 비판적 검토 - 헌재 2009.11.26, 2008헌마385 결정에 대한 평석을 겸하여 -", 헌법학연구, 16(4), pp.283~321 (2010), 한국헌법학회
- 문성제, "무의미한 연명치료 중단을 위한 제 요건 - 서울고등법원 2009. 2. 10, 2008나116869판결을 중심으로 -", 한국의료법학회지, 17(1), pp.67~94 (2009), 한국의료법학회
- 박미숙, "부작위와 공범", 비교형사법연구, 5(1), pp.6~162 (2003), 한국비교형사법학회
- 박형욱, "세브란스병원 사건의 경과와 의의", 대한의사협회지, 52(9), pp.848~855 (2009), 대한의사협회
- 성낙인, "헌법학", pp.411~ (2010), 법문사
- 안락사, 존엄사, 무의미한 치료중단의 구분, "손명세", 대한의학회, ~ (2002)
- 손명세, "안락사 : 정의, 분류 그리고 윤리적 정당화", 생명윤리, 1(1) (2000), 한국생명윤리학회
- 양천수, "안락사의 정당화 구조 - 형법철학의 측면에서 -", 형사법연구, 19(4), pp.241~260 (2007), 한국형사법학회
- 양화식, "작위와 부작위의 구별", 성균관법학, 14(1) (2002), 성균관대학교 비교법연구소
- 이백휴, "의사의 연명치료중단행위에 관한 형법적 고찰", 박사, pp.2010
- 이상돈, "치료중단과 형사책임" (2003), 법문사
- 이상복, "인간 죽음의 확정문제 : 뇌사를 중심으", 진단과 치료, 13(7) (1993), 한국의학사
- 이상용, "안락사, 그 용어의 재음미", 비교형사법연구, 5(2-1), pp.5~174 (2003), 한국비교형사법학회
- 이석배, "독일의 치료중단 기준과 입법론", 형사정책, 19(1), pp.229~251 (2007), 한국형사정책학회
- 이승호, "한국에서의 뇌사론의 전개와 제언", 법학연구, 5 (1993), 충북대학교 법학연구소
- 이용식, "형법에 있어서의 이익형량", 서울대학교 법학, 48(2), pp.1~30 (2007), 법학연구소
- 이원상, "무의미한 연명치료에 대한 법학적 고찰", 한국천주교 생명윤리위원회 공동세미나 자료집 (2010)
- 이인영, "존엄사", 한림법학, 14 (2004), 한림대학교 법학연구소
- 이인영, "연명치료중단에 대한 국민의 의식 조사연구", 임종환자의 무의미한 연명치료중단에 관한 토론회 (2009)
- 이주희, "무의미한 연명치료의 중단: 정당화가능성과 방향", 법학연구, 20(1), pp.89~111 (2012), 법학연구소[DOI]
- 이재상, "안락사의 형태와 허용한계" (1991), 김종원교수화갑기념논문집
- 임웅, "적극적 안락사의 비범죄화론, In 우범 이수성선생화갑기념논문집(인도주의적형사법과 형사정책)" (2000), 동성사
- 임채만, "사전의료의향서", 생명윤리포럼, 1(3) (2012), 생명윤리학회
- 정현미, "안락사와 형법", 형사정책연구, 5(4) (1994), 한국형사정책연구원
- 정현미, "안락사의 형법적 허용한계", 형사법연구, 16 (2001), 한국형사법학회
- 정현미, "적극적 안락사와 관련한 법적 논쟁", 형사정책연구, 18(3), pp.223~246 (2007), 한국형사정책연구원
- 최재천, "의료과실과 의료소송" (2001), 육법사
- 한정환, "작위와 부작위, 진정 부진정 부작위범의 구별", 비교형사법연구, 7(1), pp.75~98 (2005), 한국비교형사법학회
- K. Engisch, "Enthanasie und Vernichtung Lebensunwerten Lebens im straftrechtlicher Beleuchtung" (1948)
- Robert Truog, "The Problem with Futility", NEW ENG. J. MED, 326 (1992)
- Sax, "Zur rechthliche Problematik der Sterbehilfe durch vor zeitigen Abbruch einerIntensivbehandlung" (1976), JZ
- Schneider, "Tun und Unterlassen beim Abbruch Lebenserhaltender Medizinischer Behandlung", ~ (1997)
- Zimmermann, "Der Sterbende und sein Arzt Gedanken zur Euthanasieproblematik" (1977), NJW