OJMP  Vol.9 No.2 , April 2020
Rethinking of the Chinese Approach to Physician Apology Legislation: From the Legislative Dilemma of Transplantation
Abstract: Physician apology legislation has gradually become a new legislative measure to resolve medical conflicts and repair doctor-patient relationship in many countries outside the region. In almost all cases using voice, to calm analysis found that the legislation of our country doctors apologize transplantation may face an apology from responsibility way to large span, dispute resolution mechanism from the free will to the legislative mandate disorders significantly, from general to special legislation difficulties facing a predicament, and make an apology may make doctors in passive in the moral, intensifies the doctor-patient conflicts, etc. In order to resolve the dilemma and establish a physician apology system adapted to China’s national conditions, we should weaken the concept of apology liability through education, incorporate the elements of apology into the mediation mechanism of medical disputes, take the regulations on prevention and handling of medical disputes as a legislative breakthrough, and widely implement the patient safety system.
Cite this paper: Liang, X. and Feng, L. (2020) Rethinking of the Chinese Approach to Physician Apology Legislation: From the Legislative Dilemma of Transplantation. Open Journal of Medical Psychology, 9, 70-78. doi: 10.4236/ojmp.2020.92006.

[1]   Zhang, M. and Li, N. (2009) Enlightenment from American Medical Dispute Handling and Legislative Experience. Chinese Journal of Hospital Management, 25, 243-246.

[2]   Lee, T. (2000) Apology Subverted: The Commodification of Apology. Yale Law Journal, 109, 1135-1160.

[3]   Liu, X. (2017) Resolving Doctor-Patient Disputes Try to Legislate for an Apology. Health News, 2017-08-03 (006).

[4]   Chen, Y.L. (2018) Thinking about Some Issues of the “Basic Medical and Health Promotion Law (Draft)”. China Health Legal System, 26, 1-3 + 16.

[5]   Yan, Y. (2017) Function and Legislative Enlightenment of Extraterritorial Apology System in Medical Dispute Resolution. Medicine and Philosophy (A), 38, 66-70.

[6]   Man, H.J. (2017) Development of Medical Apology Law and Medical Dispute Resolution Mechanism—American Experience and China’s Approach. Contemporary Law, 31, 89-98.

[7]   Hao, W.H. (2011) Comparative Analysis of Canada-China Apology Method. Comparative Law Research, No. 6, 65-74.

[8]   Wang, L.S. (2014) Studies on American Physician Apology System and Its Impact on Evidence Law. Evidence Science, 22, 750-759.

[9]   Legrand, P. (1997) The Impossibility of “Legal Transplants”. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, No. 4, 111-124.

[10]   Chase, O. (1995) Cultural Dimensions in Civil Procedure. American Journal of Comparative Law, 45, 861-870.

[11]   Giltz (2004) Local Knowledge: An Anthropological Essay Collection. Translated by Wang Hailong and Zhang Jiaxuan, Central Compilation and Translation Press, Beijing, 223, 255.

[12]   Lazare, A. (1995) Go Ahead Say You’re Sorry. Psychology Today, January-February.

[13]   Zhai, X.W. (2016) Shame and Face: The Slightest Difference, the Most Lost. Studies in Sociology, 31, 1-25 + 242.

[14]   Dresser, R. (2008) The Limits of Apology Laws. Hastings Center Report, 38, 6-7.

[15]   Westrick, S.J. and Jacob, N. (2006) Disclosure of Errors and Apology: Law and Ethics. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 12, 120-126.

[16]   McMichael, B.J., Van Horn, R.L. and Viscusi, W.K. (2018) “Sorry” Is Never Enough: How State Apology Laws Fail to Reduce Medical Malpractice Liability Risk.

[17]   Carroll, R., Allan, A. and Halsmith, M. (2017) Apologies, Mediation and the Law: Resolution of Civil Disputes. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 7, 569-600.

[18]   Li, Q.C. (2012) Light and Darkness in American Medicine. Translated by Xu Meng, Qiuzhen Publishing House, Beijing.

[19]   Merry, A. and Smith, A.M. (2001) Errors, Medicine and the Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 286-295.