L’efficacité de l’encadrement du secours par le médecin en dehors de ses fonctions : analyse du droit québécois à la lumière du droit comparé
While coming to the aid of a person in distress (termed “rescue” in some jurisdictions) is morally commendable, the relevance of transforming this moral duty into a legal one has long been at the center of a heated debate. Despite abundant literature on the topic, in Québec and elsewhere, the issue has never been resolved. The arguments put forward are mostly of a philosophical nature. It seemed desirable to evaluate the actual impact of the legal framework applicable to doctors offering assistance outside the realm of their normal practice in order to bring the debate to more utilitarian and comparable elements. Thus, we aimed to compare the efficiency of three categories of legal rules intended to encourage off-duty physicians to act as Good Samaritans, in order to identify potential solutions to increase efficiency. A first category encompasses legal rules which impose a duty to come to the aid of a person; a second category, rules which grant immunity from civil liability; and a third category, rules which allow physicians compensation for assistance they provide. Quebec civil law integrates all three and will be the focus of this study. Its legal solutions as they relate to off-duty medical assistance will be the object of a comparative study, through a selective analysis of rules which have emerged elsewhere in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, as well as in France, regarding various aspects of this issue.
Droit de secours, Sauveteur, Bon samaritain, Responsabilité médicale, Responsabilité civile, Droit comparé, Good Samaritan, Civil law, Comparative law, Medical liability, Rescuer, Right to assistance
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations