Summary: | 碩士 === 東吳大學 === 法律學系 === 106 === The main purposes of this paper are to explore the patterns of existing entrustment models of government's long-term care service for people, and to compare the latest “Long-Term Care Services Act” and current other related social welfare supplies acts, such as : Senior Citizens Welfare Act, Physically and Mentally Disabled Citizens Protection Act, Mental Health Law, and Nursing Personnel Act, etc. In view of the fact that above new and old social welfare Acts are implemented simultaneously and have lots of overlaps in some fields. The paper, based on the principal entrusting relationships within the government and private long-term care institutions under current new and old legal systems, attempts to clarify the problems of long-term care service entrustments by means of induction and analysis.
First, the paper illustrates the responsibilities of the state for the survival and care of the people. This responsibility of the welfare supply services to people by many types of means, thus includes all kinds of entrustment methods, and these methods shall be regulated through congressional authorization and relevant acts. In particular, the welfare services supplied by government commissioned methods through “Act for Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects” and “Government Procurement Act”.
Second, the paper sums up and probes into the relevant issues related to the management regulations about entrusting ways which are applied by the government to the private long-term care institutions. In this paper, the entrusting methods about government commissioned to the private long-term care institutions are classified as: "Public -Private Partnership, PPP ", "Plan commissioned", "Case commissioned" and "all kinds of subsidies, incentives and other means" four categories. Several questions about these four categories are putted forward, such as: Is it the administrative contract or the civil contract? What is the basic legal relationships within the government and care services providers (private long-term care institutions) when the services has delivered from the government through the private long-term care institutions to the persons who receiving the service? And, what are the legal liabilities of the government and entrusted long-term care institutions which are derived from different entrustment methods? And, the most important, when the problem occurred, if the relief procedure of the dispute of the entrustment contract should be followed by civil procedure or administrative procedure?
Finally, after discussion of the present study and practical situations, it is suggested that the government should facilitate long-term care services by more commissioning of the services to promote the public welfare industry. The conclusions of this paper are intended to address the problems arising from the existing long-term care services system, such as enhancing the dignity and rights protection of long-term care personnel and the persons who receiving the care services, reinforcement and search for neglected persons who need the services, reinforcement of family caregiver (especially about the professional supports to the families with mental disorders), with a view to have better care services for the persons and reintegration into society. In addition, and put forward the vision for the future, the government should utilizes more complete systems planning and guidance to promote the long-term care services industry stronger, and to give play to our long-term care services industry's soft power going global.
|