{"title":"MODEL PERLINDUNGAN DAN PEMENUHAN HAK PASIEN TERHADAP PELAKSANAAN INFORMED CONSENT DI INDONESIA","authors":"Arif Nur Rohman, S. Syafruddin","doi":"10.22146/JMH.37504","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Law and health is a different science. But due to the rampant cases that occur related to the practice of medicine, the law contribute in providing solutions for both physicians and patients as consumers of health, although medicine has a code of professional ethics as well as Standard Operations as the basis of doctors in carrying out their work. The legal tools are still needed because in practice, there are many medical malpractices. This study focuses on 2 (two) important things, first, how judges assess the express consent on the implementation of informed consent and secondly, how the model of protection and fulfillment of patient rights in the implementation of informed consent in Indonesi.The research method used is normative legal research, because it is based on health law and the health minister's regulation as the main benchmark in analyzing, then integrates with court decisions relating to medical practices that have occurred in Indonesi.The results of the discussion illustrate that, the main point of doctors and health workers in carrying out their duties is the implementation of concrete agreements both written and oral. Empirical facts show that, doctors do not carry out the procedure because the patient is unconscious when will be a medical action. Judex Facti's consideration is entirely based on information and documents made unilaterally by doctors without medical records, this is in violation of the provisions of Article 2 paragraph (3) and (4) Regulation of the Minister of Health Rl Number 585 / Men.Kes / Per / IX / 1989 concerning medical approval. Second, the model for protecting patient rights in law enforcement is applying reverse evidence to doctors as defendants of malpractice in relation to the fulfillment of informed consent, because the medical profession is able to explain. From several cases, it appears that the judge's decision is not fundamental to informed concent, but tends to the negligence aspect of the doctor or medical personnel by referring to Article 359 of the Criminal Code, is negligence also called error, lack of caution.","PeriodicalId":30794,"journal":{"name":"Mimbar Hukum","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mimbar Hukum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22146/JMH.37504","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Law and health is a different science. But due to the rampant cases that occur related to the practice of medicine, the law contribute in providing solutions for both physicians and patients as consumers of health, although medicine has a code of professional ethics as well as Standard Operations as the basis of doctors in carrying out their work. The legal tools are still needed because in practice, there are many medical malpractices. This study focuses on 2 (two) important things, first, how judges assess the express consent on the implementation of informed consent and secondly, how the model of protection and fulfillment of patient rights in the implementation of informed consent in Indonesi.The research method used is normative legal research, because it is based on health law and the health minister's regulation as the main benchmark in analyzing, then integrates with court decisions relating to medical practices that have occurred in Indonesi.The results of the discussion illustrate that, the main point of doctors and health workers in carrying out their duties is the implementation of concrete agreements both written and oral. Empirical facts show that, doctors do not carry out the procedure because the patient is unconscious when will be a medical action. Judex Facti's consideration is entirely based on information and documents made unilaterally by doctors without medical records, this is in violation of the provisions of Article 2 paragraph (3) and (4) Regulation of the Minister of Health Rl Number 585 / Men.Kes / Per / IX / 1989 concerning medical approval. Second, the model for protecting patient rights in law enforcement is applying reverse evidence to doctors as defendants of malpractice in relation to the fulfillment of informed consent, because the medical profession is able to explain. From several cases, it appears that the judge's decision is not fundamental to informed concent, but tends to the negligence aspect of the doctor or medical personnel by referring to Article 359 of the Criminal Code, is negligence also called error, lack of caution.
法律和健康是两门不同的科学。但是,由于与医学实践有关的案件层出不穷,法律有助于为医生和作为健康消费者的患者提供解决方案,尽管医学有职业道德准则和标准操作作为医生开展工作的基础。法律工具仍然是必要的,因为在实践中,有许多医疗事故。本研究主要关注两件重要的事情,一是法官如何评估知情同意实施过程中的明确同意,二是印尼知情同意实施过程中患者权利的保护和实现模式。所使用的研究方法是规范性法律研究,因为它以卫生法和卫生部长的条例为主要基准进行分析,然后结合与印度尼西亚发生的医疗实践有关的法院判决。讨论的结果表明,医生和保健工作人员履行职责的重点是执行书面和口头的具体协议。经验事实表明,医生不进行手术是因为病人处于无意识状态时才会有医疗行为。Judex Facti的审议完全基于医生单方面提供的没有医疗记录的资料和文件,这违反了卫生部第585号条例第2条第3款和第4款的规定。Kes / Per / IX / 1989,关于医疗核准。第二,在执法中保护病人权利的模式是对作为履行知情同意方面的渎职行为被告的医生采用反向证据,因为医疗行业能够作出解释。从几个案件来看,法官的决定似乎不是知情一致的根本,而是倾向于医生或医务人员的疏忽方面,参照《刑法》第359条,是疏忽也称为错误,缺乏谨慎。