Patient rights have an increasingly significant impact on the conditions of therapy and on daily clinical practice. The fact that law might affect the doctor’s approach is confirmed in particular by the case law illustrating the claiming attitude of patients. The purpose of this study is to discuss selected verdicts of medical courts which show that it is not always the diagnosis and treatment that the patients complain about. It is important to review those issues in order to include them in the teaching programs for undergraduate and postgraduate students of medicine
Directive 2013/55/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 November 2013 amending Directive 2005/36/EC on the recognition of professional qualifications – implemented in the Polish law by way of the Act of 22 December 2015 on rules of recognition of professional qualifications acquired in the member states of the European Union (Journal of Laws of 2016, item 65).
Justice Institute https://isws.ms.gov.pl/pl/baza-statystyczna/opracowania-wieloletnie/
[retrieved on 30 March 2019 ]
Karkowska D. Ustawa o prawach pacjenta i Rzeczniku Praw Pacjenta. Komentarz (Act on patients’ rights and Patient Ombudsman. A commentary). Issue III, LEX 2016.
Medical Code of Ethics of 2 January 2004, consolidated text including the amendments passed on 20 September 2003 by the 7th General Medical Assembly, www.nil.org.pl/dokumenty/kodeks-etyki-lekarskiej [retrieved on 30 March 2019]
Kunert, I “Działalność wydziałów do spraw błędów medycznych i rozwiązywanie problemów z opiniowaniem (The activity of Medical Error Divisions and solving issues related to giving opinions), Congress on Medical Law, Krakow, 4-5 December 2018
The mechanism of warning on the ban on or restriction of practice of a profession, and on forged degrees – conference of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, Warsaw, 21 March 2019
National Health Fund (NFZ) http://www.nfz-warszawa.pl/dla-pacjenta/gdzie-sie-leczyc/sprawdz-czas-oczekiwania-na-leczenie/
Decision of the District Medical Court in Warsaw of 27 June 2018, file ref. no. OSL/Wu/ 23/17, not published.
Decision of the District Medical Court in Warsaw of 6 September 2018, file ref. no. OSL 630.2/2018, not published.
Pochrzęst-Motyczyńska, A “Pacjenci prywatnie wydają pięć razy więcej pieniędzy na rehabilitację niż NFZ (Patients spend five times more on private rehabilitation treatments than the National Health Fund)”.
State Prosecutor’s Office. The number of proceedings related to medical errors conducted by the State Prosecutor’s Offices is increasing – news of 8 May 2018;
[retrieved on 30 March 2019 ]
Regulation of the Minister of Health of 26 September 2005 on the medical criteria to be applied by healthcare providers to placement of patients on healthcare benefits waiting lists (Journal of Laws No. 200, item 1661).
Regulation of the President of the Council of Ministers of 25 April 2016 on the list of regulated professions subject to mutual warnings between member states (Journal of Laws of 2016, item 594).
Act of 6 November 2008 on patients’ rights and Patient Ombudsman (i.e. Journal of Laws of 2017, item 1318, as amended).
Act of 2 December 2009 on medical chambers (Journal of Laws No. 219, item 1708).
Act of 27 August 2009 on public finances (Journal of Laws of 2017, item 2077, as amended).
Penal Code of 6 June 1997 (i.e. Journal of Laws of 2018, item 1600, as amended).
Act of 5 December 1996 on the profession of doctor and dentist (i.e. Journal of Laws of 2018, item 617, as amended)
Verdict of the Appeal Court in Białystok of 31 May 2017, file ref. no. I ACa 1059/16, LEX no. 2323715.
Verdict of the Appeal Court in Łódź of 21 March 2017, file ref. no. I ACa 1437/14, LEX no. 2282412.
Verdict of the Appeal Court in Łódź of 9 June 2016, file ref. no. I ACa 1752/15, LEX no. 2069295.
Verdict of the Supreme Court of 27 February 2004, file ref. no. V CK 282/03, Legalis no. 67905.
Verdict of the Supreme Court of 1 April 2004, file ref. no. II CK 134/03, Legalis no. 74306.
Verdict of the Supreme Court of 20 November 1979, file ref. no. IV CR 389/79, Legalis 21746.
Verdict of the Supreme Court of 28 August 1972, file ref. no. II CR 296/72, Legalis 16492.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.