Moral values and their effect in medical practice. The moral level of medical science today. Legal speculations

Ethics is the “science which treats of human nature and the grounds of moral obligation; the science of human duty”. Medical ethics is that branch of applied philosophy which considers issues of values raised by medical practice, and should not be equated with «principlism». Differences in culture, resources, demand, level of development, and cultural and religious differences may alter ethical approaches around the world. The principles of medical ethics are beneficence, autonomy, disclosure of information, and social justice. Hippocrates is the highlight in the history of medicine. Before him, medicine was empirical and limited to observation. He is the one who created the foundations of scientific medicine, as we know it today. The practice of medicine has changed significantly from its Hippocratic roots. The requirement of competence endures. However, the doctor-patient relationship has changed, with more knowledgeable and demanding patients and the formal requirements of informed consent and respect for patient autonomy. The patient’s welfare is often complex and contested because medicine almost always has something else that could be done. The responsibilities of doctor for action or omissions at the exercise of his work are: responsibility penal, responsibility urban and responsibility disciplinary. In the Greek right up to the 1994, special legislative frame did not exist to adjust the medical responsibility. However, from the 1994, the Greek right adopts the regulation of proposal of directive of E.E, on medical responsibility and incorporates it on its interior right (2251/1994). In this right amongst others are referred: 1) the interventional medical action (medical intervention) that, by its nature and according to its aim is imposed for medical reasons and constitutes a recommended choice based on the interests of patient’s is not illegal bodily damage nor an offence against the right of the patient’s self-determination in relation to his body and health. 2) The illegality of a medical action results from the contribution of additional factors, i.e. either medical error or its implementation without the valid consent of the patient (arbitrary medical action). 3) In the case of arbitrary medical action, the doctor violates his legal (and conventional) obligation and the medical action constitutes an illegal offence against the personality of the patient, 4) The patient has claim of re-establishment of the harm caused by each damage to the body and his health that is caused by the arbitrary medical action (respectively and in the case of causing patient’s death), and 5) The patient bears the weight of proof of lack of valid consent or sufficient briefing . In this case article 8 n. 2251/1994 should not be applied. With this legislative regulation the arsenal of the patient was strengthened decisively