英文摘要 |
In Germany, the legal liability of medical interventions is always prevented by the patient's consent. The Supreme Court's judicial precedents in the civil law have recognized the so-called hypothetical consent for a long time. Later on, some criminal judgments also accepted this concept. However, it is disputed in the academic circle whether this legal figure also applies to criminal cases. However, on the one hand, this legal figure will have insurmountable difficulties in investigating the fictional willingness of the patients, and may even let the patient blackmail the physicians in consideration of testifying for the exclusion of punishments on the physicians during the litigation procedure. On the other hand, it is also full of contradictions and dilemmas in dogmatics. For example, the hypothetical consent cannot be evaluated in the level of the facts of case on the one hand and also as an independent justification on the other hand. Furthermore, the hypothetical consent may damage the subsidiarity included in the putative consent, and in the end hollow out the patient autonomy. Lastly, the context of obligation violation or legal alternative behaviors borrowed from the theory of the objective attribution can not justify the exclusion of liability attribution with the hypothetical consent. As the hypothetical consent is confronted with a lot of structural and legal dilemmas, this legal figure shall be denied both in the medical criminal law and other areas of the criminal law. Although the hypothetical consent is generally recognized in the civil law, any punishment on the doctors based on the criminal law will not automatically cause any consequences of violating the conformity of the legal order. Any solution to the questions, which are concerned with the hypothetical consent in the criminal policies, i.e. the risk limitation on the punishment of physicians, needs to be found in the source, namely the information obligation of the doctors. |