MEDICAL LAW
Year:2010 | Volume:4 | Issue:14|Papers Count:7

What is the nature of patients' rights in the criminal justice system? Is it according to Hoffiildi’s analysis of right, a duty (responsibility) or a right-privilege? In this article, besides elaborating on the nature of patient’s rights in the criminal justice system and explaining its effects, we will try to analyze the dimensions of this right in various stages of implementation of criminal justice such as prosecution, inquiry, judgment, sentencing and execution. Regarding the variety of diseases and patients in the criminal justice system in each of the mentioned stages, undoubtedly, there must be a distinguishing approach towards the patients, special patients, neurotics, etc. in particular. Analyzing such an approach in the Iranian Criminal justice system will display its strong as well as weak points. Also, the responsibility of the executors in the field of criminal justice such as the police, prosecution and investigation authorities, judges and those in charge of execution especially crimes leading to imprisonment and also the responsibilities of hygiene and treatment management in the rehabilitation centers toward the patient convicts are among other applied issues in this study. In addition, the right of enjoying acquittal by special patients, appropriate insurance services, continuous treatment and visit of the health management in the prison are among other patient rights in the criminal justice system that will be discussed here. Responsibility or non-responsibility of condemned or convict patients in paying treatment costs are of the issues capable of studying here. Finally, we will discuss the sanctions regarding non-observance of the patients’ rights in the criminal justice system.

Telemedicine is a new aspect of medicine that can be useful for different caste of human society in diverse fields. The primary goal of this technology is to support patients who may not access to medical special facilities quickly and in due time. This technology domain involves faraway consultation and medical visits to variety of surgeries through electronic systems.Telemedicine like other technologies can be both useful and harmful for human being. As this technology is a combination of medicine and IT, it can also integrate medicine crime and IT and relegate medical crimes impression to internet.Telemedicine risks that its users may encounter are people curiosity, hackers and terrorism groups misuse. This group through different means like access and revelation of people health, forgery of special medicine title, sabotage in electronic systems, virus transfer to internet networks and unofficial listening of communications pursue their illegal mental, economical or political intentions.This survey is firstly discuss potential telemedicine crimes and then through Iran penal regulations (like Islamic punishment law, electronic business law, and computer crimes law) will investigate Iran penal response to these crimes.The result have shown that although in may cases new crimes are new frames of old crimes with same nature but it seems to protect patients rights, new regulation and laws according to this crimes which are occur in cyber space should be acted.

Fee splitting, a clear manifestation of physician's breaching patient' s rights, is the breach of the principle known asbona fide with regard to the patient and the dominance of physician's financial interest on facilitation of treatment process. Yet a question is posed: Can physician's abusing patient's trust or lacks of information, whose manifestation can be observed in fee splitting, justify the necessity of criminalizing fee splitting? In fact, the point of argument is to criminalize or decriminalize fee splitting. Some patients have exposed to high cost of treatment without any medical necessity. Accordingly, the authors of this writing try to identify the necessity of providing criminal protection for this group of patients through studying the arguments posed by advocates of fee splitting and those posed by opponents. This writing then deals with constituent elements of fee splitting and studies necessary principles and features to commit this crime from the viewpoint of teachings of medical criminal law.

Classification of drugs has no long history. Many modern countries in recent decades classified different types of drugs in their judicial and legal criminal policy. The most popular classification in this respect is soft and hard drugs. The Netherlands was the pioneer in this respect.As the experiences show the third type named hybrid drugs can be known. One of the most important results of drug classification is decriminalization of some kinds of drugs besides imposing different sanctions for different class of illegal drugs. Nowadays many liberal countries classify drugs as above mentioned.

Immoral actions in medical research in past has increased that sensitivity to this subject. A review on international laws shows that sometimes these researches has violated ethics and has examined people without to tell them about the experiments. The Nuremberg law was made for to trial Nazi's Medicines in 1947 that had been experienced people without they know about the tests. According to this law voluntary consent of experienced people is necessary.According to the Helsinki declaration (1964): medicines have to study on the people with consent of them (Angellier 2001). In some ills clinical research on the patients produce verity moral problems. In these cases, in regard to their subject, national and international laws approve such research. In regard to above cases the main question in this paper is: how much are allowable medical research for national and international laws? First object was to review of international laws of related to this subject then we investigated national laws. Study is documentary - comparative and used resources were books and laws of related to medicine.

The study found that although nature of obligation of the owners of medical and dependent careers to the jurists did not mansion explicitly, this issue is clear. The majority Emamyeh jurisprudence is that the obligations of allowed treating skilful medicine can be accomplished only if he has received his acquittal. But unlike the majority of jurists in the Sunni jurisprudence that believe the obligation of medicine is obligation that not leads to specific result. In Islamic countries law, France, and the legal system's Common law, the obligation of medicine is the obligation that does not lead to specific result. In the Iranian law it seems that the owners of medical and dependent careers, who have the permission as well as the skill, have usually obligation that does not lead to specific result.

Blood transfusion centers objective is to prevent death that is risky too, because from one side it is about blood that can be infected with life threatening diseases at any time, and from the other side it deals with human body and health which is the most important asses of each individual. Therefore, it is a duty for blood transfusion centers to be equipped with latest technologies and equipments well as to have expert human resources. The governments should also support these centers with enough budget and regulations. Any default in blood transfusion procedure by the centers or by their staff can lead to incurable problems for the receiver/s on the one hand and can cause responsibility for the centers and their staff on the other hand, and should be remedied according to the Causality Principle (qaedeye Tasbib). In most cases either the default has not occurred, or if it has, it cannot be proven.Consequently, according to the above principle we cannot blame anybody for the loss or damage and ask him or her to remedy it! But this is not fair and somebody should answer for that accident. We cannot rule out the responsibility of blood transfusion centers simply because one cannot prove their default in health risks customers/ victims are facing with or the illness or harm they are coping with.Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) has a solution for this, The Principle of Deception (qaedeye Ghoror) can cover these situations and provide support and remedy for the blood transfusion victims. Sick people who trust blood transfusion centers and refer to them with confidence to acquire needed blood and assistance are in fact deceived by their name and their adverts. This makes the situations ready to apply the above principle. By applying the Principle of Deception, the deceiver is responsible to compensate, fiscally and morally, the deceived.