Using hospitals

Advance care planning and advance directives in China

Record goals and future preferences without claiming a nationwide living-will law, universal DNR form or automatic hospital acceptance.

Editorial timeline showing identity, registration, consultation, payment, reports and medicine.
AI-generated editorial illustration; not a real hospital or patient.

Advance care planning should begin while the patient can understand, express values and take part in current care; the purpose is to improve future communication, not to remove the patient from decisions that the patient can still make. This guide treats advance-care planning and directive route as a sequence of distinct decisions: support the patient's own understanding first, identify the exact task, verify whether another person has legally and institutionally accepted authority for that task, preserve the original record and apply the correct city, date and cross-border document rule. A statement of values, a current hospital consent or refusal, an intentional-guardianship agreement and a later assessment of civil or clinical capacity are different records. A serious diagnosis does not prove that a directive is active or that the patient can no longer decide. It does not decide civil or clinical capacity, appoint a guardian, determine the valid signer, interpret a foreign power, invoke an emergency exception, decide whether treatment is appropriate or replace case-specific advice from the treating team, medical institution, notary, court or qualified lawyer.

Use this as a practical starting point

Provider procedures can change, so confirm time-sensitive details with the hospital, insurer or service. A licensed professional must make clinical decisions for an individual patient.

At a glance

Key points

  • Advance care planning should begin while the patient can understand, express values and take part in current care; the purpose is to improve future communication, not to remove the patient from decisions that the patient can still make.
  • A statement of values, a current hospital consent or refusal, an intentional-guardianship agreement and a later assessment of civil or clinical capacity are different records. A serious diagnosis does not prove that a directive is active or that the patient can no longer decide.
  • Name the people who should be contacted and the role each may have, but do not call a contact the medical proxy or guardian without a separate lawful basis. A future guardian, current agent, near relative and clinician each have different functions.
  • Use exact passport identity, preferred language, date, place and witnesses or notary details where relevant. For a document made abroad, ask the Chinese hospital about translation, authentication, governing law and whether the patient must complete current institutional forms.
  • Hold the discussion with the treating or hospice team, a qualified interpreter and the people the patient chooses. Use plain descriptions of goals and avoid having family or translators substitute their own values. The clinical team must explain the current condition and available options.
  • Store the original and identified translation securely, note who received a copy and avoid public or broad cloud sharing. A document given to one hospital is not automatically visible to another, and record access by family or a future guardian still needs a verified route.
  • Current national hospice guidance and service standards support communication and advance-care planning but do not create one binding nationwide living-will form or registry. Beijing and Shanghai service standards likewise do not create Shenzhen's legal effect. Shenzhen Article 78 is local, terminal-stage and formalities-dependent.
  • An emergency team may consider quickly available and verified wishes, but the institution applies the current clinical, consent and emergency rules. Do not delay 120 while searching for a document, and do not promise that an overseas or informal statement will override lawful emergency handling.
  • Shenzhen requires respect for a qualifying directive only for an incurable terminal or end-of-life patient and where specified choices and notarization or at least two eligible witnesses and prescribed written or audio-video records are present. No equivalent nationwide or Beijing, Shanghai or Guangzhou statute was identified.
  • Do not translate 'advance directive' into a promise of legal force; state the city, stage, form and institution policy.
  • A DNR or hospice form completed for one admission is not automatically portable to another hospital or city.
  • The absence of a nationwide binding statute does not prevent patients from discussing values and asking providers to record current preferences.
01

Define the advance-care planning and directive route before asking who may sign

Advance care planning should begin while the patient can understand, express values and take part in current care; the purpose is to improve future communication, not to remove the patient from decisions that the patient can still make. Write the exact decision or administrative task at the top of the file. Receiving a clinical explanation, communicating through an interpreter, expressing a treatment choice, signing a hospital form, paying, obtaining records, speaking to an insurer and acting as guardian are different functions. One person may perform more than one only where the patient, law and institution recognize each role. A spouse, adult child, friend, employer, embassy, insurer, broker, coordinator or person carrying the passport does not acquire every role merely by being present.

Create a role table with one line for the patient, treating clinician, interpreter, companion, near relative, guardian, authorized agent, records applicant, payer, insurer and hospital decision maker. For each person, record what they may do, what evidence supports it, which institution confirmed it and when the confirmation expires or must be rechecked. Leave the status as unknown where authority has not been verified. This prevents an informal introduction such as “this is the family representative” from becoming an unsupported medical or privacy decision.

  • Exact treatment decision or administrative task
  • Patient's own role and communication needs
  • Person proposed to help or act
  • Evidence and scope of authority
  • Hospital office that confirmed the route
  • Date, trigger, duration and review point
02

Keep civil capacity, clinical understanding and ability to sign separate

A statement of values, a current hospital consent or refusal, an intentional-guardianship agreement and a later assessment of civil or clinical capacity are different records. A serious diagnosis does not prove that a directive is active or that the patient can no longer decide. Civil capacity is a legal status governed by the Civil Code and, in disputed cases, a court process. The treating team may also need to assess whether the patient can understand and communicate about the decision now, but a bedside communication problem is not automatically a judicial declaration. Temporary sedation, pain, fatigue, intubation, inability to move a hand or an unfamiliar language can affect communication or signature without proving that the person has no or limited civil capacity.

Do not infer incapacity from age, diagnosis, dementia label, disability certificate, psychiatric history, ICU admission, guardianship application, family disagreement or a foreign medical note. Ask what the institution is assessing, what support has been tried and what record it will create. Where the person's legal status or representative is disputed, obtain qualified legal advice and use the appropriate court or authority route. A website checklist cannot replace either a clinical assessment or a judicial determination.

A language barrier, diagnosis, disability or inability to hand-sign does not by itself transfer the patient's decision to a companion.

03

Support the patient's own understanding before shifting authority

Hold the discussion with the treating or hospice team, a qualified interpreter and the people the patient chooses. Use plain descriptions of goals and avoid having family or translators substitute their own values. The clinical team must explain the current condition and available options. Tell the hospital the patient's preferred language, literacy, hearing, vision, speech, cognitive and communication needs before the decision meeting. Ask which qualified interpretation or accessible communication method is available for the exact department and form. A bilingual relative may help with ordinary navigation, but complex risks, alternatives, uncertainty, numbers and end-of-life choices require a communication arrangement that the responsible team considers adequate and private.

Keep the clinician responsible for the medical explanation and the interpreter responsible for faithful communication. An interpreter does not assess capacity, recommend treatment, become a witness merely by interpreting or acquire permission to receive future records. Ask questions directly to the patient whenever possible, allow time, check understanding without coaching and document any support used. If communication remains inadequate, pause planned consent and escalate through the hospital's medical-management, international-patient or patient-service route.

  • Preferred language and communication method
  • Interpreter identity, qualification and confidentiality
  • Accessible format or assistive communication requested
  • Clinician responsible for the explanation
  • Patient questions and unresolved points
04

Verify the person, relationship and task-specific authority

Name the people who should be contacted and the role each may have, but do not call a contact the medical proxy or guardian without a separate lawful basis. A future guardian, current agent, near relative and clinician each have different functions. Ask the hospital to identify the legal and institutional basis it is using: the patient acting personally, a legal representative, a guardian, a near relative in a defined statutory route, an authorized person for a specified act or the institution's emergency approval. These labels are not synonyms. In particular, “near relative” in a medical-consent provision does not automatically mean statutory guardian, next of kin for every purpose, medical-record agent, financial representative or estate representative.

Use exact passport identity, preferred language, date, place and witnesses or notary details where relevant. For a document made abroad, ask the Chinese hospital about translation, authentication, governing law and whether the patient must complete current institutional forms. Match names, passport numbers, dates of birth and relationship evidence across the patient record and proposed authority document. Foreign names, prior passports, marriage or birth records and foreign guardianship papers may require a traceable translation and authentication chain, but the receiving institution must first state what it needs. Never enter another person's Chinese identity number, alter an official document or ask an informal broker to create a relationship or authority record that does not exist.

05

Build a document pack whose scope can be read in one minute

Keep a values statement, treatment preferences, named contacts, present authorization, intentional-guardianship agreement and hospital-specific DNR, consent or hospice forms as separate documents. Record what the document does not cover and how it can be reviewed or revoked. Put the original document beside any translation and create an index with issuer, date, parties, task, powers, limits, trigger, term, revocation method, signature or seal and authentication status. A broad title such as “power of attorney” or “family authorization” is not enough. The reader should be able to see whether the document concerns receiving information, signing one planned form, collecting records, paying, dealing with insurance or acting after loss of capacity.

Ask the hospital, notary or receiving authority whether originals, copies, notarization, an apostille, consular legalization, certified translation, local witnessing or personal appearance are required. An apostille authenticates the origin of a public document; it does not prove the document's truth, current legal effect, correct governing law, translation accuracy or suitability for the hospital's task. Notarization can strengthen evidence but cannot turn an invalid, expired, revoked or overbroad instruction into universal authority.

Apostille, legalization and notarization authenticate defined evidence; none guarantees that a hospital will accept the document for medical decision-making.

06

Run the hospital workflow as separate checkpoints

Ask the current provider whether it offers advance-care planning, hospice or palliative-care consultation, where preferences are recorded, who can see them and which forms must be completed at admission. Give controlled copies to trusted people and revisit after major health or location changes. Record the patient explanation, interpreter arrangement, identity review, authority review, clinician decision, form signing, institutional approval where required, record filing and copy request as separate events. Ask which office owns each checkpoint and who can answer an objection. A cashier, appointment agent or insurer may be able to describe logistics but should not be treated as the institution's final decision on civil capacity, guardianship or an emergency exception.

Before signing, check the patient, treatment or procedure, department, material plan, date, page count and signer role. If the plan changes, ask whether the explanation and consent record must be updated. Do not erase, replace pages, add a private translation to the original or backdate a signature. If the hospital cannot accept the proposed person or document, request the reason, missing evidence and lawful alternative in writing rather than improvising an authority chain in the corridor.

  • Clinical explanation completed
  • Communication support documented
  • Patient and proposed actor identified
  • Authority and scope accepted by the institution
  • Correct form, date and signer role
  • Copy, correction and complaint route recorded
07

Keep future planning distinct from present authorization

Current national hospice guidance and service standards support communication and advance-care planning but do not create one binding nationwide living-will form or registry. Beijing and Shanghai service standards likewise do not create Shenzhen's legal effect. Shenzhen Article 78 is local, terminal-stage and formalities-dependent. Intentional guardianship, a present task-specific authorization, a will, an advance-care plan and an advance directive answer different questions. A fully capable adult may make a written intentional-guardianship arrangement under the Civil Code, but guardianship as such is for the later period after loss or partial loss of civil capacity. A present authorization may operate only within its wording and governing law. Neither document should be described as a universal substitute for current patient consent.

National hospice guidance supports goals-of-care communication and advance-care planning, but China does not have one nationwide binding living-will statute or form. Shenzhen has a specific local rule for qualifying advance directives in an incurable terminal or end-of-life setting and with prescribed content and formalities; that rule cannot be exported to another city or earlier disease stage. Ask the responsible institution how it records current goals, who may participate and what later verification will be required.

08

Separate treatment consent from records, privacy and payment

Store the original and identified translation securely, note who received a copy and avoid public or broad cloud sharing. A document given to one hospital is not automatically visible to another, and record access by family or a future guardian still needs a verified route. A person accepted for one consent event is not automatically entitled to inspect or copy the entire record, receive portal access, send health information overseas or communicate with an employer or insurer. Use the hospital's record-copy rules for the patient or authorized agent and define the exact materials, date range, delivery method and recipient. Keep the institution-stamped copy and a secure submission log.

Medical and health information is sensitive personal information. Share only what the verified recipient needs for the stated purpose through an approved channel. Treatment consent, insurer claim authorization, employer medical-certificate intake, overseas disclosure and family access may require different notices or authorizations. Paying the bill does not make the payer the patient's decision-maker or data controller. Revoke or narrow access where the patient changes their instruction and ask the institution how that change is recorded.

09

Use the institutional emergency route without inventing one

An emergency team may consider quickly available and verified wishes, but the institution applies the current clinical, consent and emergency rules. Do not delay 120 while searching for a document, and do not promise that an overseas or informal statement will override lawful emergency handling. National law provides a medical-institution route in defined urgent circumstances when measures are needed to rescue a life-threatening patient or in a comparable emergency and the opinion of the patient or a near relative cannot be obtained. The responsible person of the medical institution or an authorized responsible person provides the required institutional approval. A companion, travel coordinator, insurer, website user or remote relative does not declare that the exception applies.

Do not delay a genuine emergency while searching for a preferred notary, overseas relative or translated authorization. Give the emergency team accurate identity, medicines, allergies, known wishes and contact information when available, then preserve the institution's record and later explanation. Equally, do not use the existence of an emergency exception to bypass communication and ordinary consent for planned care. The treating institution decides the immediate clinical and legal route on the facts.

10

Apply the city, governing law and document-origin boundary

Shenzhen requires respect for a qualifying directive only for an incurable terminal or end-of-life patient and where specified choices and notarization or at least two eligible witnesses and prescribed written or audio-video records are present. No equivalent nationwide or Beijing, Shanghai or Guangzhou statute was identified. Record the city, hospital, patient habitual residence, nationality, document origin and relevant date before relying on a rule. National Civil Code and healthcare principles apply across mainland China, while local service standards, hospital procedures and Shenzhen's special legislation can add important details. A hospital example is not a citywide rule, and a city service standard is not automatically a statute creating private authority.

Foreign-related civil-capacity and guardianship questions can engage China's conflict-of-laws statute and foreign-law ascertainment rules. A foreign order, power, marriage certificate or birth certificate may be relevant but is not automatically accepted merely because it is translated or apostilled. Ask the Chinese receiving institution what evidence it needs and obtain advice on governing law and recognition where the authority is material or contested. For documents from a non-Apostille Convention route, check current consular legalization requirements.

11

Control changes, revocation, disagreement and review

Review after diagnosis, treatment change, hospital transfer, move between cities, change of contact or guardian, new local rule, language revision or change in values. Revoke or replace visibly, tell every document holder and record the current version in the active medical file. Keep a dated log of changes in the patient's wishes, communication, clinical condition, civil-status decision, guardian, authorization, passport, relationship, hospital, treatment plan, record recipient and document validity. Ask how a revocation or replacement is delivered and acknowledged. Do not assume that a new passport, family message, notarial act or uploaded PDF automatically updates the hospital record.

If the patient, family and institution disagree, separate the dispute: whether communication was adequate, who has authority, whether a document is authentic, what the patient currently wishes, whether an emergency route was used, what was recorded and what disclosure occurred. Request the written basis and use the hospital's medical-management or complaint route, the relevant notarial or judicial route and independent legal advice as appropriate. Preserve privacy and do not publish sensitive records or accusations while seeking help.

Avoidable problems

Common mistakes

  • Treating a spouse, adult child, friend, employer, insurer or payer as the automatic medical decision-maker.
  • Treating a language barrier, diagnosis, disability, age or inability to hand-sign as proof of no civil capacity.
  • Using near relative, guardian, authorized agent, emergency contact and next of kin as interchangeable labels.
  • Assuming a person who may consent also has unrestricted record access, payment authority and overseas-disclosure authority.
  • Calling a general power of attorney or notarized paper a universal hospital consent document.
  • Assuming an apostille proves the contents, governing law or hospital acceptance of a foreign document.
  • Treating intentional guardianship as immediate replacement of a fully capable adult.
  • Describing national hospice guidance as a nationwide binding living-will law.
  • Generalizing Shenzhen's terminal-stage advance-directive rule to every city or disease stage.
  • Letting an interpreter recommend treatment, assess capacity or silently become the signer.
  • Invoking an emergency exception without the responsible medical institution's process.
  • Editing, backdating or replacing an official consent or authority record informally.
  • Calling a national hospice guideline a living-will law.
  • Generalizing Shenzhen Article 78 to planned surgery or every chronic illness.
  • Describing a directive as euthanasia or as permission for unlawful treatment.
  • Assuming notarization alone makes any content binding.
  • Leaving old conflicting versions with several hospitals.

Common questions

Frequently asked questions

Does a family relationship automatically create medical decision authority?

No. Name the people who should be contacted and the role each may have, but do not call a contact the medical proxy or guardian without a separate lawful basis. A future guardian, current agent, near relative and clinician each have different functions. Ask the responsible institution which legal route it is applying and what identity, relationship, guardianship or authorization evidence it requires for the exact task.

Does not speaking Chinese mean the patient cannot consent?

No. Hold the discussion with the treating or hospice team, a qualified interpreter and the people the patient chooses. Use plain descriptions of goals and avoid having family or translators substitute their own values. The clinical team must explain the current condition and available options. A language barrier should first trigger suitable communication support, not an automatic transfer of the patient's decision to a companion.

Can a general power of attorney cover every hospital task?

Do not assume so. Keep a values statement, treatment preferences, named contacts, present authorization, intentional-guardianship agreement and hospital-specific DNR, consent or hospice forms as separate documents. Record what the document does not cover and how it can be reviewed or revoked. The wording, governing law, trigger, duration and receiving institution's requirements must be checked separately for treatment, records, payment, insurance and other tasks.

Does an apostille make a foreign authorization valid in a Chinese hospital?

No. An apostille authenticates the origin of a qualifying public document. It does not prove the document's contents, present authority, governing law, translation accuracy, scope or acceptance for a medical decision.

Can an intentional guardian act immediately after the agreement is signed?

Not as guardian merely because the agreement exists. Current national hospice guidance and service standards support communication and advance-care planning but do not create one binding nationwide living-will form or registry. Beijing and Shanghai service standards likewise do not create Shenzhen's legal effect. Shenzhen Article 78 is local, terminal-stage and formalities-dependent. A separate present authorization may apply only if valid for the defined task and accepted by the institution.

Does treatment consent also allow access to the full medical record?

Not automatically. Store the original and identified translation securely, note who received a copy and avoid public or broad cloud sharing. A document given to one hospital is not automatically visible to another, and record access by family or a future guardian still needs a verified route. Use the hospital's patient or authorized-agent record route and define the materials, recipient and delivery scope.

Who decides whether the emergency exception applies?

The responsible medical institution applies the statutory route to the actual emergency. An emergency team may consider quickly available and verified wishes, but the institution applies the current clinical, consent and emergency rules. Do not delay 120 while searching for a document, and do not promise that an overseas or informal statement will override lawful emergency handling. A companion, insurer, website or remote family member does not invoke it.

Is there one binding advance-directive form for all of China?

No. Current national hospice guidance and service standards support communication and advance-care planning but do not create one binding nationwide living-will form or registry. Beijing and Shanghai service standards likewise do not create Shenzhen's legal effect. Shenzhen Article 78 is local, terminal-stage and formalities-dependent. Shenzhen has a specific local terminal-stage rule, while national and other local hospice standards do not create one universal statutory form.

Can a foreign guardianship order or power be used automatically?

No automatic result should be promised. Shenzhen requires respect for a qualifying directive only for an incurable terminal or end-of-life patient and where specified choices and notarization or at least two eligible witnesses and prescribed written or audio-video records are present. No equivalent nationwide or Beijing, Shanghai or Guangzhou statute was identified. The receiving institution may need identity, governing-law, recognition, translation and authentication checks, and contested cases require qualified legal advice.

What should I do if the hospital rejects the proposed signer or document?

Ask for the exact missing evidence, legal or institutional basis and authorized alternative in writing. Keep planned care and urgent care separate, preserve the refusal and obtain case-specific legal help where authority is disputed.

Is a living will legally binding everywhere in China?

No nationwide rule granting one universal and automatic effect was identified. National guidance supports planning and communication. Shenzhen has a specific local terminal-stage provision with content and form requirements; other cities and hospitals must be checked separately.

Is an advance directive the same as euthanasia?

No. Advance-care planning records goals and preferences about lawful care. Shenzhen's local provision concerns choices about invasive rescue, life support and continued treatment in a defined terminal setting; it does not legalize euthanasia or require an unlawful act.

Will notarization guarantee that a hospital follows my document?

No. Notarization can strengthen proof of identity, signature and expression, but the hospital still checks the patient's current wishes and status, the applicable local rule, document scope, clinical situation and legal limits.

Can I use an English directive made abroad?

Do not rely on it without advance confirmation. Ask the exact hospital whether it needs a Chinese translation, authentication, local witnessing or its own forms and whether the document's governing law and scope require legal review.

Evidence

Sources consulted for this guide

National rules are separated from city and provider examples. Access dates show when a source was collected; source pages and procedures can change afterward.

01Civil Code of the People's Republic of ChinaSupreme People's Court of the People's Republic of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · Official full text supporting the separate rules on full, limited and no civil capacity; minor and adult guardianship; guardian duties and respect for the person's true wishes; written intentional guardianship; medical explanation and consent; and the institution-approved emergency route. It does not decide a particular patient's civil or clinical decision-making status, identify the valid representative in a disputed cross-border case, or make a general authorization equivalent to guardianship.02Law on Basic Healthcare and Health PromotionNational Health Commission of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · Current national healthcare-rights framework, including the patient's right to know and consent and the duty to explain surgery, special examinations and special treatment, risks and alternative plans. It must be applied with the Civil Code and other controlling laws and does not create an automatic decision right for a companion, payer, insurer, employer or near relative while the patient can decide.03Regulation on the Prevention and Handling of Medical DisputesState Council of the People's Republic of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · Current national administrative regulation requiring written consent for specified surgery, special examination and special treatment workflows and addressing record access and dispute prevention. It supports documenting explanation and written consent without making every family member a decision-maker or allowing an online guide to determine validity, fault or compensation.04Hospice Care Practice Guide, 2025 EditionNational Health Commission of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · Current national hospice-care practice guide published in August 2025, replacing the 2017 trial guide. It supports goals-of-care communication and multidisciplinary hospice practice but does not create one nationwide binding living-will form, determine an individual's terminal stage or authorize treatment choices outside the responsible clinical and legal process.05Hospice Care Service StandardNational Health Commission of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · National health-industry standard supporting communication and assistance with advance-care planning in hospice services. It is a service standard rather than a national advance-directive statute and does not make every preference legally binding, require every hospital to use one form or replace patient-specific consent.06National Health Commission Response on Advance Directives and a Registration SystemNational Health Commission of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · Historical, non-binding national response published in 2021 explaining that conditions for specific legislation and a registration system were not then mature. It helps prevent claims that a nationwide registry already existed, but it must be read with the current 2025 hospice guide and later local developments and is not proof that expressing preferences is prohibited.07National Health Commission Response on Hospice-Care LegislationNational Health Commission of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · Historical, non-binding 2023 response describing unresolved issues and the absence of consensus for dedicated national hospice legislation at that time. It supports cautious status wording and does not override the current national practice guide, create an advance-directive form or establish that no later local rule can exist.08Shenzhen Special Economic Zone Medical RegulationShenzhen Municipal Health Commission · accessed 16 July 2026 · Current Shenzhen local regulation effective from 1 January 2023. Articles 71–77 address rights, explanation, consent, near relatives and emergency handling; Article 78 requires respect for a qualifying advance directive only in the defined incurable terminal or end-of-life setting and subject to specified content and notarization or witness formalities. It must not be generalized nationally or described as euthanasia.09Beijing Local Standard DB11/T 2363-2024 for Hospice Care ServicesBeijing Municipal Health Commission · accessed 16 July 2026 · Current Beijing hospice service standard effective from 1 April 2025, including treatment-goal communication and promotion of advance directives. It is a local service standard, not a Beijing statute establishing a universally binding advance-directive form, and it does not determine capacity, terminal status or hospital acceptance for a foreign patient.10Shanghai Hospice Care Service StandardShanghai Municipal People's Government · accessed 16 July 2026 · Shanghai local hospice service standard supporting service organization and communication. Because it was developed under an older national guide, it should be read with the current 2025 national practice guide; it does not establish a Shanghai-wide living-will law or prove that a particular institution will accept a foreign document.11Ministry of Justice Response on Intentional Guardianship ImplementationMinistry of Justice of the People's Republic of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · Official response describing the Civil Code basis, earlier notarial guidance and continued development of intentional-guardianship practice. It supports a cautious national overview and does not prove one nationwide registration database, standard agreement, public guardian network, foreign-passport workflow or automatic hospital recognition.12Typical Public-Legal-Service Case Combining Guardianship, Will and Advance-Care ArrangementsMinistry of Justice of the People's Republic of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · A 2026 official typical case illustrating one professionally designed combination of intentional guardianship, a will and advance-care wording. It is an example rather than generally binding law and must not be copied as a national standard form, a treatment instruction or proof that every notary or hospital accepts the same package.13Personal Information Protection Law of the People's Republic of ChinaStanding Committee of the National People's Congress · accessed 16 July 2026 · National rules classifying medical and health information and personal information of minors under fourteen as sensitive personal information and requiring a specific purpose, necessity and strict safeguards. They also support separate-consent checks for sensitive processing and cross-border provision where consent is the lawful basis, but do not determine every hospital's other lawful processing basis or replace recipient-specific authorization.14Provisions on the Administration of Medical Records in Medical Institutions, 2013 EditionNational Health Commission of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · National framework for patient and authorized-agent requests, identity and agency evidence, copyable record components, institutional verification marks and retention periods. It supports treating record access as a distinct task and does not make a medical-consent signer, companion, payer or insurer automatically entitled to every record.15Notary Law of the People's Republic of ChinaStanding Committee of the National People's Congress · accessed 16 July 2026 · Current national notary-law text listing matters such as entrustment, declarations, wills, kinship, signatures and document copies that may be notarized. It supports using a notary for defined evidence purposes and does not convert one notarized document into universal medical, financial, record-access and guardianship authority.16Rules on Notarization ProceduresMinistry of Justice of the People's Republic of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · Current national notarization procedure rules covering identity, personal appearance for specified acts, evidence examination and certain overseas authorization routes. They help plan a notarial evidence chain but do not make notarization a universal validity requirement, cure an overbroad authorization, prove capacity at a later medical event or compel hospital acceptance.17Questions and Answers on Cancellation of Foreign Public-Document Legalisation under the Apostille ConventionMinistry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China · accessed 16 July 2026 · Official explanation of the apostille's authentication function and the continuing need to check receiving-authority requirements. It supports the warning that an apostille verifies the origin of a public document rather than its substantive legal effect, translation accuracy, scope, expiry or suitability for a medical task.