아동 주치의제도에 관한 연구

Abstract

As the health medical field is an important legislative area in which the social infrastructure and institutional infrastructure for children to be born and grow peacefully are prioritized, in terms of social changes including low birth rate and future generation protection, the national responsibility for health care for children continues to increase. In particular, the current health medical laws in Korea lacks a health and medical system that can continue to take care of children's growth and development processes like the family doctor system for children, so that children's health medical still has a structure in which parental or family take the main responsibility. Therefore, this study aims to seek legislative alternatives for establishing a health medical system with a long-term perspective to protect children's health rights, and it will examine the need to introduce a system in which health care for children can be continuously managed from a long-term perspective for children's health rights such as the family doctor system. In this regard, it was intended to draw implications by comparing and analyzing legislative precedents and operational experiences related to the French and Swedish family doctor systems that have already introduced and implemented the family doctor system. Sweden eased regional restrictions on the choice of a primary doctor and laid the institutional foundation to further strengthen patients' health care choice even in a situation where regional medical deviations are large. In addition, after failed to introduce a primary doctor system one time, through the revised Public Health Service Act in 2005, France institutionalized the family doctor system to be settled naturally within the health care system as they stipulates that the whole nation can autonomously designate one’s doctor, that children are designated by their parents, and that children aged 16 or older have the right to choose their doctor, and the qualification of a primary doctor is also defined in a way that is not limited to general doctors but also to specialists and practitioners. As a result, it was confirmed that the primary doctor systems of both countries allowed the primary medical system to strengthen and to be settled to the efficiency of medical resources from a long-term perspective. Based on these cases of comparative legal study, the legislative improvements needed when introducing a child’s family doctor system are as follows. First, the initial introduction of a child’ family doctor system should be introduced in the way that children or parents can voluntarily choose their doctor and in the case that the treatment of specialist in a special field needs, they can designate a physician in the field as an exception, rather than emphasizing universalization. Second, a child may have a parent or legal representative to choose one's doctor, and if an independent doctor is available, it may be necessary to consider the relevant age criteria. In addition, when choosing a primary doctor, it needs to avoid restricting the region by considering the medical gap between regions and the specificity of the medical area. In addition, the qualification of children's doctors is based on the family-centered doctors' system, and it would be reasonable to expand the range of options for children's doctors so that they can also select other doctors according to the disease and health characteristics of pediatrics.