题名

結核病隔離治療法制之檢討:實證研究與合憲性分析

并列篇名

Examining the Tuberculosis Isolation Law and Policy: An Empirical and Constitutional Analysis

DOI

10.6199/NTULJ.2016.45.01.02

作者

林欣柔(Shin-Rou Lin)

关键词

結核病 ; 多重抗藥性結核病 ; 隔離治療 ; 傳染病防治法 ; 公共衛生 ; 人身自由 ; 強制住院 ; tuberculosis ; multi-drug resistant tuberculosis ; isolation ; Infectious Disease Control Act ; public health ; personal liberty ; compulsory hospitalization

期刊名称

臺大法學論叢

卷期/出版年月

45卷1期(2016 / 03 / 01)

页次

83 - 150

内容语文

繁體中文

中文摘要

本文以結核病隔離治療之法規內容及執行實況為素材,探討以傳染病防治法第44、45條為法源依據之結核病隔離治療法制合憲性。本文發現:第一,隔離治療之要件過於概括,未以病人對公眾健康的具體風險為依據,且實際運用上逾越法律授權範圍,混淆不同目的之拘禁手段;第二,衛生人員可能因法律上欠缺對其他侵害較小手段之授權及醫療、社會支持措施,逕以隔離治療作為解決病人經濟、社會問題之方法,未全然符合較小侵害原則;第三,病人的社經地位潛在地成為影響衛生人員隔離治療決定之重要因素;第四,欠缺重要程序保障機制,包括適當的法官保留與及時法院救濟。為使結核病隔離治療法制符合憲法第8條第1項剝奪人身自由應經正當法律程序之要求,傳染病防治法應依不同目的,區別不同拘禁手段之要件,揚棄「必要時」此種空洞的實體要件,改以具體行為風險為標準,提供病人健康、安全的環境以達成拘禁目的,並依最近司法院就非刑事被告拘禁之程序保障所作成之解釋意旨,強化程序保障內涵,提供病人及時法院救濟及法院定期審查。

英文摘要

This article analyzes how Taiwan's tuberculosis isolation regulatory scheme authorized under Article 44 and 45 of the Communicable Disease Control Act (Act) was implmented to check the constitutionality of the isolation power. It finds that: first, the requirements for TB isolation are too general, not based on specific risk to public health posed by patients; its implmentation might have gone beyond the scope of legal authorization since the authorities confused different powers of detention; second, the use of isolation power was not completely in line with the least restrictive means principle; due to unavailability of legally authorized less restricitve means and lack of medical and social support system, public health officials had little choice but to use isolation as a temporary relief to the patients' economic and social problems; third, socio-economic status of patients potentially became an important factor for isolation decisions; fourth, the isolation regulatory scheme are short of significant procedural safeguard mechanism, including appropriate and timely judicial review. To comply with the requirements of article 8, paragraph 1 of the Constitution, the Act should authorize different detention powers based on different purposes of confinement; the "when necessary" limit on isolation is too vague and should be abadoned; the isolation power agasinst TB patients should be justified by assessment of patients' risk behavior; patients have a right to healthy and safe environments for detention and are entitled to procedural protections provided to non-criminal detainees, i.e. timely court remedies and periodic review held in recent Judicial Yuan Explanations.

主题分类 社會科學 > 法律學
参考文献
  1. 許宗力(2012)。論法律明確性之審查:從司法院大法官相關解釋談起。臺大法學論叢,41(4),1685-1742。
    連結:
  2. World Health Organization (2007). WHO guidance on human rights and involuntary detention for XDR-TB control. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/tb/features_archive/involuntary_treatment/en/
  3. 衛生福利部(2013)。《歷年結核病死亡率:民國八十八年至一○一年》。載於:http://www.mohw.gov.tw/cht/DOS/DisplayStatisticFile.aspx?d=32247
  4. 衛生福利部中央健康保險署(2011)。《全民健康保險各總額部門歷年點值》。載 於:http://www.nhi.gov.tw/Resource/webdata/20113_2_197%E6%AC%A1%20%E8%A1%A826-27%E7%B8%BD%E9%A1%8D%E5%AD%A3%E5%A0%B1.pdf
  5. 衛生福利部疾病管制署(2012)。《臺灣地區法定傳染病統計:100 年(年報),第三類法定傳染病確定病例人數統計: 縣市別( I ) 》。載於:http://www.cdc.gov.tw/uploads/report/3bc469c6-3190-42f0-a73e-475ec9144b2e.pdf
  6. 衛生福利部疾病管制署(2013)。《臺灣地區法定傳染病統計:101 年(年報),第三類法定傳染病確定病例人數統計: 縣市別( I ) 》。載於:http://www.cdc.gov.tw/uploads/report/8f956d70-584d-4b67-aa02-4a3ce4349890.pdf
  7. World Health Organization (2015). Tuberculosis Fact Sheet. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs104/en/.
  8. Gerberding, J. L. (2007). Testimony on recent case of extensively drug resistant TB: CDC's public health response. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/washington/testimony/2007/t20070606.htm
  9. 衛生福利部中央健康保險署(2005)。《全民健康保險醫療費用總額支付制度問答輯》。載於:http://www.nhi.gov.tw/Resource/webdata/Attach_13636_2_8.2%EF%BC%9A%E7%B8%BD%E9%A1%8DQA%E6%89%8B%E5%86%8A%E7%AC%AC%E5%85%AD%E7%89%88%E5%90%AB94%E5%B9%B4.pdf
  10. 行政院衛生署(2006)。《結核病十年減半全民動員計劃:行政院95 年7月7 日院臺衛字第0950031290 號函核定》。臺北:自刊。
  11. 衛生福利部疾病管制署(2010)。《臺灣地區法定傳染病統計:98 年(年報),臺灣地區第三類法定傳染病確定病例人數統計:縣市別(I)》。載於: http://www.cdc.gov.tw/uploads/report/94596a10-9488-4ebf-80c0-642f6d6d2484.pdf
  12. 衛生福利部疾病管制署(2013)。《臺灣地區法定傳染病統計:101 年(年報),第二類法定傳染病確定病例人數統計: 年齡別( I ) 》。載於:http://www.cdc.gov.tw/uploads/report/6d06c55a-9130-45f4-ae88-9d934cd00ae9.pdf
  13. The Center for Law and Public's Health at Georgetown and Johns Hopkins Universities. (2001). Model State Emergency Health Powers Act. Retrieved from http://www.publichealthlaw.net/MSEHPA/MSEHPA.pdf
  14. Annas, G. J.(1993).Control of tuberculosis - The law and the public's health.New England Journal of Medicine,328(8),585-588.
  15. Brimnes, N.(2008).BCG vaccination and WHO's global strategy for tuberculosis control 1948-1983.Society, Science and Medicine,67(5),863-873.
  16. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(2006).Revised definition of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis.Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report,55(43),1176.
  17. Chan, E. D.,Laurel, V.,Strand, M. J.,Chan, J. F.,Huynh, M.-L. N.,Goble, M.,Iseman, M. D.(2004).Treatment and Outcome Analysis of 205 Patients with Multidrug-resistant Tuberculosis.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine,169(10),1103-1109.
  18. Cheng, S. H.,Chen, C. C.,Chang, W. L.(2009).Hospital Response to a Global Budget Program Under Universal Health Insurance in Taiwan.Health Policy,92(2-3),158-164.
  19. Coker, R. J.(2001).National survey of detention and TB.Thorax,56(10),818-820.
  20. Dowdle, W. R.(1989).A strategic plan for the elimination of tuberculosis in the United States.Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report,38(S-3),1-25.
  21. Dubos, R.,Dubos, J.(1952).The White Plague: Tuberculosis, Man and Society.New Brunswick, NY:Rutgers University Press.
  22. Duffy, S. T.(2009).The power of detention in the management of non-compliance with tuberculosis treatment: A survey of Irish practitioners and analysis of potential legal liability.Public Health,123(1),81-85.
  23. Gasner, M. R.,Maw, K. L.,Feldman, G. E.,Fujiwara, P. I.,Frieden, T. R.(1999).The use of legal action in New York City to ensure treatment of tuberculosis.New England Journal of Medicine,340(5),359-366.
  24. Goble, M.,Iseman, M. D.,Madsen, L. A.,Waite, D.,Ackerson, L.,Horsburgh, Jr.,C. R.(1993).Treatment of 171 Patients with Pulmonary Tuberculosis Resistant to Isoniazid and Rifampin.New England Journal of Medicine,328(8),527-532.
  25. Gostin, L. O.(2008).Public Health Law: Power, Duty, Restraint.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
  26. Iseman, M. D.(1993).Treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis.New England Journal of Medicine,329(11),784-791.
  27. Lin, S. R.(2013).A Costly Illusion?: An Empirical Study of Taiwan's Use of Isolation to Control Tuberculosis Transmission and its Implications for Public Health Law and Policymaking.Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal,14(3),107-166.
  28. Maunder, R.,Hunter, J.,Vincent, L.,Bennett, J.,Peladeau, N.,Leszcz, M.,Mazzulli, T.(2003).The immediate psychological and occupational impact of the 2003 SARS outbreak in a teaching hospital.Canadian Medical Association Journal,168(10),1245-1251.
  29. Maxwell, J. A.(2005).Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach.London, England:SAGE Publications.
  30. Office of Technology Assessment, United States Congress(1993).The continuing challenge of tuberculosis.
  31. Rothstein, M. A.,Alcalde, M. G.,Elster, N. R.,Majumder, M. A.,Palmer, L. I.,Stone, T. H.(2003).,未出版
  32. Schwartzman, K.,Menzies, D.(1999).Tuberculosis: 11. Nosocomial disease.Canadian Medical Association Journal,161(10),1271-1277.
  33. Somocurcio, J. G.,Sotomayor, A.,Shin, S.,Portilla, S.,Valcarcel, M.,Guerra, D.,Furin, J.(2007).Surgical Therapy for Patients with Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis: Report of 121 Cases Receiving Community-Based Treatment in Lima, Peru.Thorax,62(5),416-421.
  34. U.S. Deapartment of Health & Human Services(2000).Core Curriculum on Tuberculosis: What the Clinician Should Know.Atlanta, Ga:U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.
  35. Weiler-Ravell, D.,Leventhal, A.,Coker, R.J.,Chemtob, D.(2004).Compulsory detention of recalcitrant tuberculosis patients in the context of a new tuberculosis control programme in Israel.Public Health,118(5),323-328.
  36. World Health Organization(2006).The global plan to stop tuberculosis: 2006-2015.
  37. Zhao, Y.,Xu, S.,Wang, L.,Chin, D. P.,Wang, S.,Jiang, G.,Wang, Y.(2012).National survey of drug-resistant tuberculosis in China.New England Journal of Medicine,366(23),2161-2170.
  38. 王振源(2008)。影響結核病患者傳染力的因素以及服藥後傳染力的改變情形。防癆雜誌,冬季號,21-24。
  39. 行政院(2005)。中華民國95 年度中央政府總預算案:歲出機關別預算表。臺北:自刊。
  40. 行政院衛生署疾病管制局(2012)。臺灣結核病防治年報2012。臺北:自刊。
  41. 行政院衛生署疾病管制局(2009)。結核病防治工作手冊。臺北:自刊。
  42. 行政院衛生署疾病管制局(2002)。結核病防治工作手冊。臺北:自刊。
  43. 行政院衛生署疾病管制局(2002)。民國九十年結核病防治年報。臺北:自刊。
  44. 李建良(2003)。從正當法律程序觀點透析SARS 防疫相關措施。台灣本土法學雜誌,49,85-98。
  45. 李建良(2011)。人身自由的憲法保障與強制隔離的違憲審查:釋字第690號解釋。台灣法學雜誌,186,60-79。
  46. 李政益、王若珊、劉定萍、楊祥麟、黃湘芸(2014)。臺灣結核病流行概況與未來衝擊。疫情報導,30(6)
  47. 林明鏘(2003)。論SARS 所生之行政法上法律關係:以醫療院所為中心。台灣本土法學雜誌,49,99-113。
  48. 林欣柔(2012)。從美國紐約市結核病拘禁法令評析臺灣結核病隔離治療制度。政大法學評論,125,287-367。
  49. 林超駿(2012)。非刑事預防性拘禁之法官(院)保留:兼評釋字第六九○號解釋。月旦法學雜誌,207,176-200。
  50. 林超駿、陳長文(2012)。論待遣送外國人合憲收容要件:預防性拘禁觀點。政大法學評論,125,193-286。
  51. 柯秉志(2014)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。新竹,國立交通大學科技法律研究所。
  52. 張淑卿(2004)。博士論文(博士論文)。新竹,國立清華大學歷史學研究所。
  53. 許建邦、羅秀雲、李政益、楊祥麟、王貴鳳、楊世仰(2008)。臺灣都治(DOTS)執行經驗及成效初探。疫情報導,24(3),184-203。
  54. 許義寶(2013)。論外國人收容之相關法律問題:兼論入出國及移民法第38 條未來之修正。中央警察大學國土安全與國境管理學報,20,151-196。
  55. 陳英鈐(2003)。抗煞(SARS)!要人權就不要命?:隔離與人身自由的保障。月旦法學雜誌,98,193-204。
  56. 陳英鈐(2004)。SARS 防治與人權保障:隔離與疫情發佈之憲法界線。憲政時代,29(3),391-443。
  57. 陳清秀(2003)。SARS 傳染病之疫情防治法制相關問題。台灣本土法學雜誌,49,43-51。
  58. 陳愛娥(2004)。疾病控制的憲法問題:以我國政府在SARS 事件中的應變措施作為反省基礎。月旦法學雜誌,105,31-47。
  59. 黃錦堂(2004)。疾病的控制的行政法問題:以嚴重急性呼吸道症候群(SARS)為討論。月旦法學雜誌,105,9-30。
  60. 詹凱傑(2013)。論現行入出國及移民法第三十八條之外國人收容制度。警學叢刊,44(3),125-141。
  61. 廖元豪(2015)。「即時司法救濟」的具體化:行政訴訟法與提審法新修規定之評析。月旦法學教室,147,64-76。
  62. 廖元豪(2014)。「外人」的人身自由與正當程序:析論大法官釋字第七○八與七一○號解釋。月旦法學雜誌,228,244-262。
  63. 劉宏恩(2003)。「書本中的法律」(Law in Books)與「事實運作中的法律」(Law in Action)。月旦法學雜誌,94,336-341。
被引用次数
  1. (2023)。我國法實證研究社群的發展現況—知識結構、引用網絡與質性分析。中研院法學期刊,33,1-80。