The judge has the freedom to exercise his power of decision especially when he must protect fundamental liberties such as the right to respect for life and the right of the patient to consent or refuse medical treatment. The exercise of this power is made in order to ensure - if it is edited on the medical condition of the patient - the effect that would have the medical decision to interrupt a medical treatment.

The legal provisions on patient rights apply regardless of whether or not the patient is in the terminal state, so they can also refer to the state of minimum consciousness in which the relatives are found, bearing in mind that the artificial feeding and hydration used in the case of the applicant is a treatment. The Marriett Legal injury lawyers can help with identifying the measures necessary for your case.

Treatment against apnea

The judge has suspended the execution of an order to change the ways of enrollment and cost suppression using mandatory medical insurance for the medical device with continuous positive pressure (PPC) for the treatment of sleep apnea syndrome.

Taking into account the foreseen terms, patients considered as not meeting the criteria will be considered as being deprived of any refund. From this point of view, the critical condition must be regarded as fulfilled.

On the other hand, this decision stipulates that coverage of costs by the health insurance of each treatment can be reduced and then suppressed for patients who, taking into account the daily use data of the PPC medical device, will not meet the requirements of the order concerned.

The fact that the Minister's signatory to that order was not in charge of this is likely to create serious doubt about its legality and a straight appearance in favor of the contestant.

The right to the image of the patient

A pediatrician diffuses multiple friends on an email list to which a three-image photo is attached, giving information on the birth and treatment of children born following an in vitro fertilization procedure.

The complainants claim that this email contains incriminating terms both to them and to their two children and, on the other hand, that the attached photo violates the child's right to his / her image by claiming the tortuous civil liability of the pediatrician. Ghost claims that this email, sent by a doctor to other doctors, is confidential.

The Court finds that a document does not necessarily have a confidential character in the mere fact that a doctor sends it to other doctors. Moreover, the Court considers that, despite the affirmations of the pirate, the photo attached to the e-mail was the one that allowed children to be identified.

Instead, to assert that the pediatrician had infringed the patient's right to his / her image, the Court admitted that it had been photographed without the permission of the parents, the only ones able to do so.

Applying photographies to e-mail demonstrates that neither image capture nor dissemination has been done without prior authorization from the patient's parents and that it constitutes a breach of privacy and the right to image and allows the right to compensation for the damage suffered. See more.

The foreseeable risk of a necessary surgical procedure

The Court finds that, given the evidence provided by the experts, the hemiplegia of which the applicant is directly attributable to the surgeon is a foreseeable complication of the excretion of an intracranial epidermoid cyst.

In spite of the intervention, the slow and regular cyst growth, without the possibility of natural resorption, allows for severe medical difficulties for the patient, and the development of arterial hypertension is a deadly risk.

From this, it is deduced that the patient had to suffer, in order to obtain an improvement of his state of health, an indispensable intervention that presents a vital risk related to his pathology. The likelihood that has been achieved and all the severe consequences of the medical act do not have an unusual character about its state of health, such as its foreseeable evolution.

The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union: reimbursement of medicines and transparency. Servier Laboratories marketed in France Protelos, a drug indicated for osteoporosis treatment in postmenopausal women.

Check this out: https://www.thebalancecareers.com/what-is-a-personal-injury-lawyer-2164350

In 2011, the French authorities considered that the costs of Protelos by the insurance system were to be restricted, taking particular account of the fact that absorption of this drug could lead to venous thromboembolism, especially in women with age over 80 years. Protelos is therefore reimbursed.