ABOUT LECTURER

JUDr. Tomáš Holčapek, Ph.D., is a member of the Department of Civil Law and of the Centre for Medical Law at the Law Faculty, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. He teaches civil procedure and health law. Furthermore, he is a practicing attorney with main focus on civil law and litigation. His main areas of academic interest include consent with treatment, liability for medical malpractice and law of evidence in medical malpractice disputes.

SEMINAR ANNOTATION

Basic Issues of Evidence in Litigation Arising from Medical Care

The application of modern medicine inevitably leads to mistakes and wrong treatment committed by the health care providers towards patients. They may result in liability and, in consequence, legal disputes. If the health care sector is to successfully develop and, at the same time, rights of the patients to be protected, it is necessary that justified claims be compensated but also that unjustified claims be dismissed. For fair resolution of litigation arising from asserted liability for medical malpractice, sufficient and correct finding of facts is necessary. The fact may then allow the court to legally determine whether the claim in question is justified or not.

The elementary building blocks of civil liability as perceived in civil litigation will be discussed, especially which facts must be proved, who has the burden of proof in their respect, how convincing the proof must be and what techniques are available to make such burden lighter. These may comprise e.g. factual presumptions, liability for loss of chance or other proportional liability. Current Czech law, including also recent case-law of Czech courts, concerning these issues will be presented.

ABOUT LECTURER

Mgr. et Mgr. Anna Nevečeřalová has completed her law degree at the Faculty of Law of the Charles University following with a two-year master’s degree in Applied ethics at the Catholic Theological Faculty of the Charles University. She then read for a postgraduate diploma in Christian Ethics at the University of Oxford. Anna is an attorney majoring in medical law and currently she reads for Ph.D. in jurisprudence at the Faculty of Law of the Charles University.

SEMINAR ANNOTATION

Medical mediation and its use in the palliative care

As a preface to the conflict resolution, the seminar will shortly cover the end-of-life decisions and their legal framework. It will identify the major sources of conflict and possible ways to mitigate it. As to conflict resolution the seminar will introduce the concept of medical mediation and its use in the palliative care – the parties to be included, the steps to be taken in order to reach an agreement and the implementation of the agreement.

 

ABOUT LECTURER

MUDr. ThLic. Jaromír Matějek, Ph.D., Th.D is an employee of the Institute of Ethics and Humanities of the 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, employee of ethical counseling at the Královské Vinohrady University Hospital. In 2019 he received the highest German qualification in ethical counseling in health care [Ethikberater / Koordinator / Trainer für Ethikberatung im Gesundheitswesen (AEM), Göttingen]. His next topic is the previously expressed wishes of patients.
He is a member of the Ethics Committee of the Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic and a member of the Committee for Pediatric Palliative Care at the Czech Society of Palliative Medicine.

SEMINAR ANNOTATION

Ethics Consultations Service - Practical Aid for Resolving Ethical and Communication Problems in Everyday Clinical Practice

This lecture brings complex overview of the ethics consultations services in hospitals. It is based on experience from US, German and Czech environment. The lecture presents definition of the services, structures and ways of providing, methodology of clinical case ethics consultations (communication and ethical level) and role of the ethics consultations services in improving of organizational culture.

 

 

ABOUT LECTURER

JUDr. Mgr. Martin Šolc (born 1991) studied law at the Law Faculty of Charles University and applied ethics at the Catholic Theological Faculty of Charles University. He is currently an internal doctoral student at the Department of Civil Law of the Faculty of Law of Charles University and a researcher at the Center for Health Law at the same faculty. In addition to civil law, he focuses on health law and its context with bioethics, especially in relation to medical research and genetics. He is a co-author of the book Health Law (Wolters Kluwer, 2016), and he is also the author of the monograph Law, Ethics and Stem Cells (Wolters Kluwer, 2018), and also publishes in journals. He teaches civil and medical law at the Law Faculty of Charles University and occasionally also at the 3rd Medical Faculty of Charles University.

SEMINAR ANNOTATION

Importance of timely and open communication for the prevention actions

The recommendation that healthcare professionals can sometimes hear in legal liability training is never to admit a mistake to the patient without consulting a lawyer. Indeed, the widespread fear of complaints and complaints, even without expert advice, leads some health professionals to conceal their failures. This keeps a culture of silence that manifests itself through a wide range of negotiations, from patient avoidance to tampering with medical records. Such behavior by healthcare professionals and health service providers is based on simple intuition that the best defense against the legal consequences of error is its concealment in the sense of an old legal proverb "where there is no plaintiff, there is no judge".

However, there is a lively discussion in foreign literature, especially American literature, as to whether this intuition corresponds to reality. Indeed, a number of studies suggest that timely communication of complete information and apologies may actually reduce the risk of action. If this hypothesis is true, open communication with patients and their families is not only beneficial for patient safety, but is also beneficial for healthcare providers. They are then particularly motivated to implement early disclosure and aplogy programs. It seems that a situation arises from which all participants benefit.

However, the question is whether a timely excuse actually reduces the number of actions and, if so, under what conditions. When looking for an answer, we first focus on the motivation of the injured to bring an action against the health service provider. Subsequently, we will analyze the available evidence on the relationship of early apology and the frequency of actions for damages. Finally, we will try to identify those parameters of the early information and apology program that are most advantageous for the injured, for patient safety in general, and for health service providers.

Academic programme of previous years

Academic programme of previous years