由於病人對醫學知的不足，一般傾向否定病人與有過失之成立，但隨著病人權益與醫師告知義務之重視，逐漸肯認病人在醫療過程中，共同參與角色及其配合義務。基於危險損害公平分配，德國文獻逐漸有肯定病人與有過失之聲，德國實務雖然也肯認病人與有過失成立之可能性，但以醫療提供方已確實盡到告知義務為前提，病人在可以認識到自己應有的配合義務與意義下，始可成立與有過失。德國實務在醫療意外風險分配上，非常小心謹慎地肯認病人與有過失成立之可能性，在此吾人可以發現透過加害人主張被害人與有過失，實務逐漸周延加害者（醫療提供方）之說明義務，因此，雖然病人之與有過失可能被肯認，但基本上病人權益並未被忽視，反而是更周延，因此，本文希望透過德國實務病人與有過失類型之介紹，提供國內對於醫療意外損害合理分配之另一思考方向。依據德國實務之見解，病人與有過失成立之要件有三：一、醫療提供方已盡說明義務；二、病人有真正義務或非真正義務違反之情形；三、違反自己之過失；四、病人義務之違反，與損害之產生或擴大有因果關係。至於病人對於其義務違反有違反自己之過失，其過失判斷，依德國民法第276 條第 1 項規定，而未成年病人對於自己之行為是否有與有過失之適用，則依德國民法第 276 條第 3 項規定，準用德國民法第 827、828 條規定。病人是否應承擔第三人之過失與參與損害之行為，則依德國民法第254 條第 2 項第 2 句對於使用人（第三人），也須負同一過失責任，且德國民法第 278 條對於使用人之過失有適用。但是究竟是要件準用還是效果準用，則有爭議。德國實務基於對未成年人之特別保護，以有契約或類似契約關係存在為前提，始對法定代理人之過失負同一責任，畢竟未成年人無法選擇父母親，不宜讓其負擔過重責任。而病人體質特殊，非病人所能控制，故無過失。

In Relation to lack of medical knowledge of patient would generallyhardly recognize their negative in medical malpractice. But with the gradualrespected patients’ rights would observe the informed consent. The Judgmentexpects participatory role and its cooperation obligations from patients inmedical process. The Patient must correctly follows medical advice, such asmedication or drug compliance, chronic wound care, self-directedphysiotherapy exercises. And medical compliance is often an important factorin healing process. Both the patient and the health-care provider affect apositive medical opportunity. Non compliance thwarts a medical Treatment.On the basis of equitable distribution of risk damage Germany literaturegradually recognizes the obligation of patient in medical Treatment. TheGerman judgment stipulates enough of Information about medical Treatmentform medical provider beforehand acceptance of the obligation of patient tocompliance in medical process. The German judgment very care to kenacknowledged of patient in medical accident. The German judgment sets us agood example.There are 3 reconditions in recognition of cooperation obligation patientsin Germany. 1. health care providers have made obligation of explanation; 2.patients have hurt their cooperation duty or obligation to compliance; 3.culpable negligence against themselves.As the patient negligence violate his obligation against himself, on thebasis of German civil law article No. 254 the patient contributes his damagewith the health care provider together. The criterion for a decision of their negligence is Germany civil law articleNo. 276. The underage patient is liable for his own negligence in case of hiscompensation under German Civil law article No. 827, 828 in connection withGerman Civil law article No. 276. The underage patient should be responsiblefor negligence of his helper in case of his own compensation under GermanCivil law article No. 254, 2nd. But Germany practice based on the special protection of underages, tohave a contractual or similar relationship to conditions of contract, began thesame responsibility for negligence of legal representatives (their parents).