Advertisement

Medical Responsibility and Liability in France

  • Eric BaccinoEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The first section of this chapter introduces the issue of medical liability in France, while the second one examines the epidemiological data within the same context. The third section looks at juridical procedures in penal jurisdictions, civil jurisdictions and administrative jurisdictions. Subsequently, non-juridical procedures intervening in medical responsibility are examined, looking at the Council of the Order of Medical Doctors and the Commission régionale de conciliation et d’indemnisation des accidents medicaux (CRCI). The sixth section of this chapter examines the nomination of experts in cases of medical responsibility, while the seventh deals with expert examination of living persons and cadavers. The penultimate section looks at the evaluation criteria for medical error/inobservances in France. This chapter concludes with present and future prospects concerning the issue of medical responsibility in France.

Keywords

Expert Opinion Medical Error Medical Responsibility Penal Code Civil Court 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References Suggested by the Editors

  1. Black D (1998) The limitations of evidence. J R Coll Physicians Lond 32:23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Brennan TA, Leape LL, Laird NM, Hebert L, Localio AR, Lawthers AG, Newhouse JP, Weiler PC, Hiatt HH (1991) Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients—results of the Harvard Medical Practise Study I. N Engl J Med 324:370–376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fischer G, Fetters MD, Munro AP, Goldman EB (1997) Adverse events in primary care identified from a risk-management database. J Fam Pract 45:40–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Hofer T, Herr E, Hayward R (2000) What is an error? Eff Clin Pract 6:261–269Google Scholar
  5. Hughes G (2009) Litigation, redress and making amends. Emerg Med J 26:844PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hurwitz B (2004) How does evidence based guidance influence determinations of medical negligence? J R Coll Physicians Lond (BMJ 329:1024)Google Scholar
  7. O’Neil AC, Petersen LA, Cook EF, Bates DW, Lee TH, Brennan TA (1993) Physician reporting compared with medical-record review to identify adverse medical events. Ann Intern Med 119:370–376PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Scobie S, Thomson R, McNeil JJ, Phillips PA (2006) Measurements of the safety and quality of health care. Med J Aust 184:S51–55Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Legal Medicine and Clinical ToxicologyUniversity of Montpellier, Service de Médecine Légale Hôpital LapeyronieMontpellier CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations