Global ETD Search

1	Estudo retrospectivo dos casos de erro de diagnóstico médico veterinário recebidos na rotina de necropsia do Serviço de Patologia Animal - FMVZ/USP dos anos de 2012 a 2016 / Retrospective study of cases of veterinary malpractice in diagnosis received in the necropsy routine of the Animal Pathology Service - FMVZ / USP from the years 2012 to 2016 Raquel Gonçalves Gomes 06 February 2018 (has links) Erro médico é uma importante causa de morte na medicina humana, estimando-se ser a terceira causa de morte nos Estados Unidos. Podemos enquadrar de modo geral os erros em imperícia, imprudência e negligência. Há ainda na medicina humana um impasse ético entre revelar ou não ao paciente e/ou familiares a ocorrência do erro, o qual estudos revelam que divulgar o erro seja o mais apropriado. Observa-se também a importância de erros médicos em medicina veterinária, que apresenta similaridades com os casos humanos. Tanto em medicina humana quanto em veterinária o profissional envolvido em erro pode responder juridicamente nas esferas civil e/ou criminal. O Código de Ética do Médico Veterinário do CFMV, no artigo 14 inciso I prevê a responsabilização do médico veterinário em casos de imprudência, imperícia e negligência. O profissional da saúde deve sempre atualizar seus conhecimentos, a fim de se evitar a ocorrência de casos de erro médico. Especificamente no que diz respeito ao diagnóstico, a depender da natureza da enfermidade e resposta do organismo do paciente frente a doença, não há obrigatoriedade do profissional no acerto, mas sim na utilização de todos os meios disponíveis para se chegar ao diagnóstico, sempre em comum acordo com o proprietário. Dada a maior demanda tanto de atendimento médico veterinário, pela maior expectativa de vida dos pacientes e maior preocupação dos proprietários em fornecer os cuidados médico veterinários devidos, quanto pela crescente ocorrência de processos judiciais contra os profissionais envolvidos em casos suspeitos de erro, há a necessidade de se desenvolver estudos multidisciplinares nas esferas médico veterinária, jurídica e da relação proprietário-médico veterinário. Assim, este estudo levantou os casos de erro médico veterinário com foco nos erros em diagnóstico da casuística de necropsia do Serviço de Patologia Animal do Departamento de Patologia da Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia da Universidade de São Paulo FMVZ-USP dos anos de 2012 a 2016. Foi analisada a casuística geral e separada a relativa às necropsias documentadas. Os cães forma os animais que apresentaram maior frequência na casuística de erros, tanto na geral quanto de necropsias documentadas. A negligência foi a ocorrência mais frequente, e na casuística geral observou-se uma maior frequência de animais adultos, enquanto nas necropsias documentadas houve mais casos de filhotes. O sistema respiratório se mostrou o mais suscetível a sofrer negligência no diagnóstico clínico, e as doenças mais comumentes negligenciadas são as infecciosas e neoplásicas, respectivamente. Assim, este estudo sugere a necessidade de maior atenção por parte dos médicos-veterinários quanto à anamnese e exame físico, que devem ser cuidadosos, bem como a solicitação adequada de exames complementares necessários para uma abordagem diagnóstica efetiva. / Medical malpractice is an important cause of death in human medicine, estimating to be the third leading cause of death in the United States. We can generally frame errors in incompetence, imprudence and negligence. There is still in human medicine an ethical impasse between revealing or not to the patient and / or relatives the occurrence of the error, which studies reveal that disclosing the error is most appropriate. It is also observed the importance of medical errors in veterinary medicine, which presents similarities with human cases. In both human and veterinary medicine, the professional involved in error may be legally blamedin the civil and/or criminally. The Code of Ethics of the Veterinarian, in article 14, section I provides for the responsibility of the veterinarian in cases of incompetence, imprudence and negligence. The health professional should always update his knowledge in order to avoid the occurrence of cases of medical malpractice. Specifically regarding the diagnosis, depending on the nature of the disease and the response of the patient\'s body to the disease, there is no obligation on the professional to correct it, but on the use of all available means to arrive at the diagnosis, always in common according to the owner. Given the greater demand for both veterinary care, longer patient life expectancy, and greater concern of owners to provide due veterinary care, and the increasing occurrence of legal proceedings against professionals involved in suspected cases of error, there is a need to develop multidisciplinary studies in the veterinary, legal and veterinary-veterinarian relations. Thus, this study has raised the cases of veterinary error with focus on errors in the necropsy diagnosis of the Animal Pathology Service of the Department of Pathology of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science of the University of São Paulo - FMVZ-USP for the years 2012 to 2016. We analyzed the general and separate case series on documented necropsies. Dogs form the animals that presented the highest frequency in the series of errors, both in general and documented necropsies. Neglect was the most frequent occurrence, and in the general casuistry a greater frequency of adult animals was observed, whereas in documented necropsies there were more cases of pups. The respiratory system has been shown to be most susceptible to negligence in clinical diagnosis, and the most commonly neglected diseases are infectious and neoplastic, respectively. Thus, this study suggests the need for greater attention on the part of the veterinarians regarding anamnesis and physical examination, which should be careful, as well as the appropriate request for complementary tests necessary for an effective diagnostic approach. Erro médico-veterinário Imperícia Imprudência Medicina Veterinária Legal Negligência Imcompetence Imprudence Negligence Veterinary Forensics Veterinary Malpractice
2	Estudo retrospectivo dos casos de erro de diagnóstico médico veterinário recebidos na rotina de necropsia do Serviço de Patologia Animal - FMVZ/USP dos anos de 2012 a 2016 / Retrospective study of cases of veterinary malpractice in diagnosis received in the necropsy routine of the Animal Pathology Service - FMVZ / USP from the years 2012 to 2016 Gomes, Raquel Gonçalves 06 February 2018 (has links) Erro médico é uma importante causa de morte na medicina humana, estimando-se ser a terceira causa de morte nos Estados Unidos. Podemos enquadrar de modo geral os erros em imperícia, imprudência e negligência. Há ainda na medicina humana um impasse ético entre revelar ou não ao paciente e/ou familiares a ocorrência do erro, o qual estudos revelam que divulgar o erro seja o mais apropriado. Observa-se também a importância de erros médicos em medicina veterinária, que apresenta similaridades com os casos humanos. Tanto em medicina humana quanto em veterinária o profissional envolvido em erro pode responder juridicamente nas esferas civil e/ou criminal. O Código de Ética do Médico Veterinário do CFMV, no artigo 14 inciso I prevê a responsabilização do médico veterinário em casos de imprudência, imperícia e negligência. O profissional da saúde deve sempre atualizar seus conhecimentos, a fim de se evitar a ocorrência de casos de erro médico. Especificamente no que diz respeito ao diagnóstico, a depender da natureza da enfermidade e resposta do organismo do paciente frente a doença, não há obrigatoriedade do profissional no acerto, mas sim na utilização de todos os meios disponíveis para se chegar ao diagnóstico, sempre em comum acordo com o proprietário. Dada a maior demanda tanto de atendimento médico veterinário, pela maior expectativa de vida dos pacientes e maior preocupação dos proprietários em fornecer os cuidados médico veterinários devidos, quanto pela crescente ocorrência de processos judiciais contra os profissionais envolvidos em casos suspeitos de erro, há a necessidade de se desenvolver estudos multidisciplinares nas esferas médico veterinária, jurídica e da relação proprietário-médico veterinário. Assim, este estudo levantou os casos de erro médico veterinário com foco nos erros em diagnóstico da casuística de necropsia do Serviço de Patologia Animal do Departamento de Patologia da Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia da Universidade de São Paulo FMVZ-USP dos anos de 2012 a 2016. Foi analisada a casuística geral e separada a relativa às necropsias documentadas. Os cães forma os animais que apresentaram maior frequência na casuística de erros, tanto na geral quanto de necropsias documentadas. A negligência foi a ocorrência mais frequente, e na casuística geral observou-se uma maior frequência de animais adultos, enquanto nas necropsias documentadas houve mais casos de filhotes. O sistema respiratório se mostrou o mais suscetível a sofrer negligência no diagnóstico clínico, e as doenças mais comumentes negligenciadas são as infecciosas e neoplásicas, respectivamente. Assim, este estudo sugere a necessidade de maior atenção por parte dos médicos-veterinários quanto à anamnese e exame físico, que devem ser cuidadosos, bem como a solicitação adequada de exames complementares necessários para uma abordagem diagnóstica efetiva. / Medical malpractice is an important cause of death in human medicine, estimating to be the third leading cause of death in the United States. We can generally frame errors in incompetence, imprudence and negligence. There is still in human medicine an ethical impasse between revealing or not to the patient and / or relatives the occurrence of the error, which studies reveal that disclosing the error is most appropriate. It is also observed the importance of medical errors in veterinary medicine, which presents similarities with human cases. In both human and veterinary medicine, the professional involved in error may be legally blamedin the civil and/or criminally. The Code of Ethics of the Veterinarian, in article 14, section I provides for the responsibility of the veterinarian in cases of incompetence, imprudence and negligence. The health professional should always update his knowledge in order to avoid the occurrence of cases of medical malpractice. Specifically regarding the diagnosis, depending on the nature of the disease and the response of the patient\'s body to the disease, there is no obligation on the professional to correct it, but on the use of all available means to arrive at the diagnosis, always in common according to the owner. Given the greater demand for both veterinary care, longer patient life expectancy, and greater concern of owners to provide due veterinary care, and the increasing occurrence of legal proceedings against professionals involved in suspected cases of error, there is a need to develop multidisciplinary studies in the veterinary, legal and veterinary-veterinarian relations. Thus, this study has raised the cases of veterinary error with focus on errors in the necropsy diagnosis of the Animal Pathology Service of the Department of Pathology of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science of the University of São Paulo - FMVZ-USP for the years 2012 to 2016. We analyzed the general and separate case series on documented necropsies. Dogs form the animals that presented the highest frequency in the series of errors, both in general and documented necropsies. Neglect was the most frequent occurrence, and in the general casuistry a greater frequency of adult animals was observed, whereas in documented necropsies there were more cases of pups. The respiratory system has been shown to be most susceptible to negligence in clinical diagnosis, and the most commonly neglected diseases are infectious and neoplastic, respectively. Thus, this study suggests the need for greater attention on the part of the veterinarians regarding anamnesis and physical examination, which should be careful, as well as the appropriate request for complementary tests necessary for an effective diagnostic approach. Erro médico-veterinário Imcompetence Imperícia Imprudence Imprudência Medicina Veterinária Legal Negligence Negligência Veterinary Forensics Veterinary Malpractice
3	Affective Rationality Kerr, Alison Duncan January 2014 (has links) No description available. Philosophy emotion rationality affect emotion regulation decision making deliberation irrationality arational imprudence acumen emotion assessments dynamic rationality static rationality fitting warranted beneficial acuminous imprudent
4	La coaction en droit pénal / Co-perpetration in criminal law Baron, Elisa 07 December 2012 (has links) Le coauteur est traditionnellement défini en droit pénal comme l’individu qui, agissant avec un autre, réunit sur sa tête l’ensemble des éléments constitutifs de l’infraction. Pourtant, il est permis de douter de la pertinence de cette affirmation tant la jurisprudence comme la doctrine en dévoient le sens.En réalité, loin d’être cantonnée à une simple juxtaposition d’actions, la coaction doit être appréhendée comme un mode à part entière de participation à l’infraction. En effet, elle apparaît comme un titre d’imputation à mi-chemin entre l’action et la complicité, auxquelles elle emprunte certains caractères. Autrement dit, elle se révèle être un mode de participation à sa propre infraction. Surtout, son particularisme est assuré par l’interdépendance unissant les coauteurs : parce que chacun s’associe à son alter ego, tous sont placés sur un pied d’égalité. Ces différents éléments, qui se retrouvent dans sa notion et dans son régime, permettent ainsi d’affirmer la spécificité de la coaction tout en renforçant la cohérence entre les différents modes de participation criminelle. / In criminal law, the co-perpetrator is classically presented as an individual who, acting jointly with another, gathers all the constitutive elements of the offence. However, one may harbor doubts concerning the relevance of this assertion since both case law and legal scholars denature its meaning.Actually, far from being limited to a mere juxtaposition of perpetrations, co-perpetration must be understood as a full mode of participation in the offence. Indeed, it appears as a form of imputation halfway between perpetration and complicity, from which it borrows some characteristics. In other words, it proves to be a mode of participation in one’s own offence. Above all, its particularism is provided by the interdependence between the co-perpetrators : because each of them joins forces with his alter ego, all are placed on an equal footing. These elements, which are found both in it’s concept and in it’s regime, demonstrate thereby the specificity of co-perpetration while strengthening the coherence of the different modes of criminal participation. Action Aide Autorité Causalité Circonstances agravantes Chef d’entreprise Chose jugée Commencement d’exécution Communication pénale Compétence Complicité Connexité Emprunt de criminalité Entente Faits justificatifs Fautes concurrentes Fautes conjuguées Filiale Groupe de sociétés Imprudence Imprudence commune Indivisibilité Infraction collective Instigation Intention Interdépendance Participation Peine justifiée Personne morale Préposé, Résultat Solidarité Subordination Tentative Violences collectives Perpetration Aiding and abetting Authority Causal link Aggravating circumstances Civilian superiors Res judicata Initiation of execution Criminal communication Jurisdiction Complicity Connexity Borrowing of criminality Common plan Justifications Subsidiary Group of companies Recklessness Collective recklessness Imputability Imputation Indivisibility Collective offence Instigation Intent Interdependence Participation Justified sentence Legal persons Agent Solidarity, subordination Attempt Collective violence 340
5	Les conditions de la responsabilité en droit privé : éléments pour une théorie générale de la responsabilité juridique / The conditions of responsibility in private law : elements for a general theory of legal responsibility Lagoutte, Julien 16 November 2012 (has links) Alors que l’on enseigne classiquement la distinction radicale du droit pénal et de la responsabilité civile, une étude approfondie du droit positif révèle une tendance générale et profonde à la confusion des deux disciplines. Face à ce paradoxe, le juriste s’interroge : comment articuler le droit civil et le droit pénal de la responsabilité ? Pour y répondre, cette thèse suggère d’abandonner l’approche traditionnelle de la matière, consistant à la tenir pour une simple catégorie de classement des différentes branches, civile et pénale, du droit de la responsabilité. La responsabilité juridique est présentée comme une institution autonome et générale organisant la réaction du système à la perturbation anormale de l’équilibre social. Quant au droit de la responsabilité civile et au droit criminel, ils ne sont plus conçus que comme les applications techniques de cette institution en droit positif.Sur le fondement de cette approche renouvelée et par le prisme de l’étude des conditions de la responsabilité en droit privé, la thèse propose un ordonnancement technique et rationnel du droit pénal et de la responsabilité civile susceptible de fournir les principes directeurs d’une véritable théorie générale de la responsabilité juridique. En tant qu’institution générale, celle-ci engendre à la fois un concept de responsabilité, composé des exigences de dégradation d’un intérêt juridiquement protégé, d’anormalité et de causalité juridique et qui fonde la convergence du droit pénal et du droit civil, et un système de responsabilité, qui en commande les divergences et pousse le premier vers la protection de l’intérêt général et le second vers celle des victimes. / While the radical distinction between criminal law and civil liability is classically taught, a thorough survey of positive law reveals a general and profound trend towards a confusion of these two disciplines. Faced with this paradox, the jurist wonders : how to articulate the civil and criminal laws of responsibility ? To answer this question, the thesis suggests abandoning the traditional approach of the subject, which consists in treating it as a mere category of classification of the different branches, civil and criminal, of responsibility/liability. Legal responsibility is presented as an autonomous and general institution organizing the response from the system to abnormal disturbance of social equilibrium. Civil liability law and criminal law are, as far as they are concerned, henceforth conceived as the mere technical applications of this institution in positive law.On the basis of this new approach and through the prism of the study of liability conditions in private law, the thesis proposes a technical and rational organization of criminal law and civil liability that may provide the guiding principles of a real general theory of legal responsibility. As a general institution, it gives not only a concept of responsibility, requiring degradation of a legally protected interest, abnormality and legal causation, and establishing the convergence of criminal law and civil law, but also a system of responsibility, determining the divergences of them and steering the first towards the protection of general interest and the second towards the protection of victims. Anormalité Antijuridicité Bien juridique Causalité juridique Causalité Cause étrangère Cessation de l’illicite Complicité Contrainte Culpabilité Dangerosité Discernement Dol général Dol spécial Dommage Droit des obligations Droit pénal Faits justificatifs Faute simple Faute Fautes qualifiées Force majeure Illicéité Immunités de fonction Imprudence consciente Imprudence inconsciente Imputabilité Infraction impossible Infraction Intention Mobile Personnalité juridique Personnalité morale Préjudice écologique Préjudice extrapatrimonial Préjudice patrimonial Préjudice Présomptions Principe de précaution Responsabilité civile Responsabilité contractuelle Responsabilité des personnes morales Responsabilité du fait d’autrui Responsabilité du fait des choses Responsabilité du fait personnel Responsabilité extracontractuelle Responsabilité juridique Responsabilité pénale Responsabilité pour faute Responsabilité préventive Responsabilité sans faute Résultat légal Risque Tentative Troubles du voisinage Volonté Abnormality Aggravated faults Attempt Causation Cessation of illegality Civil liability Complicity Duress Contractual liability Corporate personality Crime Criminal law Criminal liability Culpability Damage Dangerousness Discernment Dolus directus Dolus specialis Ecological damage External cause Fault Fault-based liability Force majeure Functional immunities Harm Illegality Impossible crime Individual responsibility Intent Justifications Law of obligations Legal causation Legal consequences Legal personality Legal property Legal responsibility Liability of corporations Material damage Mere faults Moral damage Motive Neighbourhood disturbances Precautionary principle Presumptions Preventive responsibility Recklessness Negligence Responsibility for the actions of things Risk Strict liability Tortious liability Vicarious responsibility Wilfulness 340

1

Page generated in 0.0708 seconds