歷史宿命或時代使命？台灣社會工作專業介入醫療爭議事件之分析

A Destiny or a Mission? Analysis of Social Work Intervention in Medical Dispute in Taiwan

10.29814/TSW.200907.0001

陳武宗；賴宛瑜；郭惠旻；林東龍

社會工作 ； 醫療爭議 ； 修復性正義 ； 公開談論 ； social work ； medical dispute ； restorative justice ； open disclosure

臺灣社會工作學刊

7期（2009 / 07 / 01）

1 - 48

繁體中文

本文嘗試從台灣醫療體制改革和醫院內外醫療爭議處理機制變遷的社會脈絡中，分析社會工作專業者介入處理醫療爭議事件的現況、態度，以及困境，並思索社會工作專業者在醫療爭議領域發展的空間與可行性。本研究結合量化與質化研究方法，一方面，針對任職醫學中心和區域醫院之社會工作者（不含精神科），以郵寄問卷方式進行普查；另一方面，針對5名在醫院處理醫療爭議、具社會工作專業背景的人員，進行深度訪談。 本研究發現有三：第一，多數醫務社會工作部門參與處理醫療爭議事件，社會工作者對介入醫療爭議事件亦持正面態度；第二，社會工作專業者在醫療爭議領域中扮演醫病溝通橋樑、在職教育講師、案例統計分析，以及人員考核的間接評估者等角色，協助化解和預防醫療爭議，有助提升社工專業地位；第三，當社會工作者會需介入賠償談判時，會感受較大壓力，但此壓力隨著醫院醫療爭議處理機制的制度化與角色分工，降低社工介入此議題的衝突、壓力，以及倫理爭議。 本研究建議有二：第一，提供多元且實務取向的訓練課程，培養社工處理醫療爭議事件的敏感度和專業能力；第二，建立以修復性正義為基礎的醫療爭議處理機制，促成醫、病，以及台灣社群三贏的局面。

This study attempts to analyze social workers' roles, attitudes, and difficulties when they intervene in medical disputes under the context of health care system reforms and medical dispute resolving mechanisms inside and outside the hospitals in Taiwan, and then speculates upon the development and possibilities of the social workers' involvement in the field of medical dispute. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used. In one hand, this study conducted a general survey by mailing questionnaires to the social workers in social work departments (psychiatry departments not included) of those medical centers and regional hospitals in Taiwan. On the other hand, in-depth interview was applied where five interviewees, who were highly experienced all played important roles in the dealing process of medical disputes in hospitals. There are three major findings including: first, most medical social work departments in Taiwan indeed have intervened in handling medical disputes, and the medical social workers held positive attitudes toward their intervention roles in medical disputes. Second, the social workers have been playing several important roles including the mediator between the doctors and patients, the instructor of on-the-job training, the analyzer of medical dispute cases, and indirect evaluator of employees performance. These roles may help to prevent more medical disputes from reoccurrence, and have improved the medical procedures and professional position of social work. Third, the involvement in compensation negotiation during the medical disputes handling process have brought pressures to medical social workers; however, following the increasingly systematic structure of the medical dispute resolution mechanisms in hospitals, there has been clearer division of collaboration among various roles. Thus, the conflicts, pressures, and moral controversies of social workers' roles regarding this issue have been alleviated to some degree. This study concluded with two suggestions. First, the social work professional association or the academics should offer courses to improve social workers' professional ability in dealing with the roles conflicts and ethical dilemma while dealing with the medical disputes. Second, the conflict resolution system as well as the communication mechanism of open disclosure should be built-up and based on restorative justice so as to achieve a 'win/win/win' situation among the doctors, patients, and community.

1. Berger, C.,Cayner, J.,Jensen, G.,Mizrahi, T.,Scesny, A.,Trachtenberg, J.(1996).The Changing Scene of Social Work in Hospitals.Health & Social Work,21,167-177.
2. Black, D.(1993).The Social Structure of Right and Wrong.San Diego:Academic Press.
3. Bornstein, B. H.,Rung, L. M.,Miller, Monica K.(2002).The Effects of Defendant Remorse on Mock Juror Decisions in a Malpractice Case.Behavioral Sciences and the Law,20,393-409.
4. Caputi, M. A.(1978).Social Work in Health Care: Past and Future.Health and Social Work,3(1),10-29.
5. Cook, C.,Easthope, G(1996).Symptoms of a Crisis? Trust, Risk and Medicine.Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology,32(3),85-98.
6. Fielding, S. L.(1995).Changing Medical Practice and Medical Malpractice Claims.Social Problems,42(1),38-55.
7. Fraser, J. J.,the Committee on Medical Liability(2001).Technical Report: Alternative Dispute Resolution in Medical Malpractice.American Academy of Pediatrics,107(3),602-607.
8. Iedema, R.,Jorm, C.,Wakefield, J.,Ryan, C.,Dunn, S.(2009).Practising Open Disclosure: Clinical Incident Communication and Systems Improvement.Sociology of Health & Illness,31(2),262-277.
9. Iedema,R.,Mallock, N.,Sorensen, R.,Manias, E.,Tuckett, A.,Williams, A.,Perrott, B.,Brownhill, S.,Piper, D.,Hor, S.,Hegney, D.,Scheeres, H.,Jorm, C.(2008).The National Open Disclosure Pilot: Evaluation of A Policy Implementation Initiative.The Medical Journal of Australia,188(7),397-400.
10. Keigher, S. M.(1997).What Role for Social Work in the New Health Care Practice Paradigm?.Health and Social Work,22(2),149-155.
11. Kohn, Linda T.(Ed.),Corrigan, Janet M.(Ed.),Donaldson, Molla S.(Ed.)(2000).To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System.Washington:National Academy Press.
12. Leape, L. L.,Hilborne, L. H.,Park, R E.,Bernstein, S. J.,Kamberg, C. J.,Sherwood, M.,Brook, R. H(1993).The Appropriateness of Use of Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery in New York State.Journal of the American Medical Association,269(6),753-760.
13. McNutt, J. G.(1995).The Macro Practice Curriculum in Graduate Social Work Education: Results of a National Study.Administration in Social Work,19(3),59-74.
14. Petrek, F. R.,Slovis, M. R.(1998).The Defendant in a Medical Malpractice Suit: An Integral Part of the Defense Team.Pediatr Radiol,28,905-912.
15. 台灣醫療改革基金會(2009)。白色巨塔內的醫療糾紛只能摸黑解決。醫改雙月刊，31，2-4。
16. 朱柔若、林東龍(2003)。醫療公道如何討？台灣醫療糾紛處理機制弊病之探索。醫事法學，11(3&4)，31-61。
17. 李雲裳(1980)。社會工作者在醫療糾紛上角色期待之研究。台北市:國泰綜合醫院。
18. 林東龍、朱柔若、陳武宗(2009)。搓圓子湯或醫療正義─醫療糾紛第三方之探索性研究。醫事法學，16(3)，43-69。
19. 林東龍、彭武德、陳武宗(2009)。『告』與『不告』之間─台灣醫療糾紛病患及其家屬之行動分析。長庚人文社會學報，2(1)，165-199。
20. 林萬億、沈詩涵(2008)。邁向專精之路：台灣社會工作的下一步。社區發展季刊，121，199-233。
21. 侯宜伶(2000)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。長庚大學管理學研究所。
22. 姚嘉昌(2001)。醫療糾紛之探討。台灣醫界，44(12)，64-66。
23. 洪千鵬(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立中正大學企業管理研究所。
24. 張修維(2000)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄醫學大學行為科學研究所。
25. 莫藜藜(1998)。醫務社會工作。台北市:桂冠。
26. 許春金(2003)。修復式正義的實踐理念與途徑─參與式刑事司法。犯罪與刑事司法研究，1，37-66。
27. 許振東(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。東吳大學法律學研究所。
28. 陳武宗、許碧芬、陳重吟、吳幸容、林玉娟(2008)。為與不為之間─白色巨塔內醫療爭議事例的社會工作回應。追求公平正義社會：社會工作專業的挑戰研討會，台北市:
29. 陳淑芬(2000)。全民健保實施後醫務社會工作個案問題比較研究─以83年至85年彰化基督教醫院社會工作部門個案為例。中華醫務社會工作學刊，8，123-136。
30. 陳榮基編(1993)。台灣醫療糾紛的現況與處理。台北:健康文化公司出版社。
31. 楊秀儀(2001)。醫療糾紛與醫療無過失制度。政大法學評論，68，1-41。
32. 劉文瑢(1996)。先進國家處理醫療糾紛之對策─民事訴訟外紛爭處理制度。醫事法學，5，28-38。
33. 謝忠焚(1998)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。中國醫藥學院醫務管理研究所。
34. 謝啟瑞(1994)。醫療糾紛風險與防禦性醫療行為。人文及社會科學集刊，6(2)，199-230。
35. 蘇盈貴(2001)。從醫療倫理看未來醫療糾紛處理方向─醫療糾紛處理法草案初探。台灣醫界，44(2)，59。

1. 蔡芝欣,林潔,王美富(2022)。探討跨專業團隊醫療事件合作經驗－以精神醫療社工為例。身心障礙研究季刊，20(1)，32-67。
2. 鄭麗珍、游美貴、許雅娟(2014)。臺灣社會工作人員的一般健康初探。臺灣社會工作學刊，14，103-156。
3. (2024)。《醫療事故預防及爭議處理法》實施與醫務社會工作者處理醫療爭議之角色探討。社區發展季刊，186，401-417。