[Fault Criteria on Court and Clinical Guidelines in Legal Court Proceedings].

Abstract

At present, there are a variety of guidelines for psychiatric and other departments. In general, guidelines are positioned as specific documents of reference suggested for clinical settings that state appropriate health care services to be provided. However, since many types of guidelines with varying characteristics are often published by academic societies and organiza- tions, it is difficult to assess clinical guidelines unambiguously. The Medical Information Net- work Distribution Service, operated by the Japan Council for Quality Health Care with the support of a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare, collects, assesses, and selects clinical guidelines published in Japan. On the other hand, in medical lawsuits filed to determine whether malpractice has occurred, guidelines serve as evidence that provides reference standards for principally judging faults or negligence. When courts make decisions regarding duties of care imposed on physicians and their violations, they tend to emphasize clinical guidelines developed by medical societies and other organizations, and establish the norm of conduct of "these guidelines". This is significantly different from the medical community's view of clinical guidelines. The medical and judicial communities are cur- rently being advised to deepen mutual understanding of these guidelines.