The Urgency of Restorative Justice on Medical Dispute Resolution in Indonesia

Medical disputes in Indonesia are regulated by a host of laws. The important question that needs to be asked, however, is whether those laws have guaranteed justice for patients and doctors. This study aims to analyze the urgency of restorative justice in medical disputes. It explores secondary data and is normative legal research. The data was gathered through library research consisting of data collection activities based on several publications. This study focuses on legal principles with a doctrinal approach. It concludes that restorative justice is urgent to use in medical, criminal, and civil cases. This is evident in the will of the Health Law which prioritizes mediation as the first mechanism before being brought to trial. Furthermore, the use of restorative justice in medical dispute resolution is driven by the presence of three conditions: First is structural challenges among law enforcers and their limited capabilities in dealing with complex medical cases; Second is the condition of Indonesian correctional institutions which is overburdened and unable to provide maximum output, and the third is the relatively low number of Indonesian health workers. (Sengketa Medis di Indonesia telah diatur dalam beberapa peraturan perundang-undangan. Namun, pertanyaan penting yang perlu diajukan yaitu apakah peraturan yang ada telah menjamin kedilan bagi pasien dan dokter. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis urgensi prinsip keadilan restoratif dalam penyelesaian sengketa medis. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif yang mengkaji data sekunder. Pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan studi pustaka (library research), yaitu kegiatan pengumpulan data yang berasal dari berbagai literatur. Penelitian ini fokus pada asas-asas hukum dengan pendekatan dokrinal. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah bahwa prinsip keadilan restoratif penting diterapkan dalam kasus medis, pidana, maupun perdata. Ini misalnya dapat dilihat dari i’tikad baik dalam Hukum Kesehatan yang mempriorotaskan mediasi sebagai mekanisme pertama sebelum dibawa ke pengadilan. Dalam konteks sengketa medis, prinsip keadilan restoratif menjadi urgen untuk diterapkan sedikitnya karena tiga hal; pertama adalah tantangan struktural di kalangan para penegak hukum serta kemampuan mereka yang terbatas dalam menghadapi kasus medis yang biasanya kompleks. Kedua, kondisi lembaga pemasyarakatan Indonesia yang over kapastias sehingga tidak mampu memberikan output yang maksimal; dan ketiga adalah jumlah tenaga kesehatan di Indonesia yang relatif rendah.

Kedudukan Majelis Kehormatan Disiplin Kedokteran Indonesia dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Medis antara Dokter dan Pasien

This article aims to analyze the position of the Indonesian Medical Discipline Honorary Council in the Settlement of Disputes between Doctors and Patients. Medical disputes due to alleged violations of medical discipline should be resolved through the Indonesian Medical Discipline Honorary Council, however currently there are still medical disputes that are reported to the court without going through the Indonesian Medical Doctors Honorary Council. This study uses a normative juridical research method with a statute approach and a conceptual approach. The results of this study are based on Article 66 paragraph (1) and paragraph (3) of Law Number 29 of 2004 concerning Medical Practices, there is still legal uncertainty regarding the resolution of medical disputes between doctors and patients, because the word "can" contained in paragraph (1) can mean that the complaint against the Indonesian Medical Discipline Honorary Council may or may not be made. Whereas in paragraph (3) it is stated that it is possible to resolve medical disputes through the courts, which can cause medical dispute resolution to be carried out through the courts.

The Influence Factors of Medical Disputes in Shanghai and Implications - From The Perspective of Doctor, Patient and Disease

Background Based on the cases collected in eight hospitals in Shanghai in recent three years, causes of medical disputes in Shanghai and influence factors of medical dispute levels were explored, and targeted suggestions were put forward. Methods Multistage sampling were used to collect 561 cases of medical disputes occurred in two Tertiary hospitals, two Secondary hospitals and four primary hospitals. The causes of medical disputes were analyzed by descriptive statistics and the factors affecting medical dispute were analyzed by means of one-way ANOVA and Logistic regression analysis. Results Factors of doctor and patient are involved in the causes of medical disputes, with 87.1% disputes related to doctors and 13.9% related to patients. The doctor’s factors include lack of communication (28.82%), low technical level (16.91%), lack of sense of responsibility (8.86%), defective case records (6.92%), imperfect operation (6.44%), inadequate experience (6.44%), inadequate condition evaluation (5.8%), irregular management process (4.03%), violation of diagnosis and treatment regulation (4.03%), misdiagnosis and mistreatment (3.54%), belated diagnosis and treatment (2.58%), postoperative complications (2.42%), equipment problems (1.13%), missed diagnosis (0.81%), poor condition monitoring (0.48%), unreasonable charge (0.48%) and poor service attitude (0.32%). The patient's factors include misunderstanding of medical behavior (43.48%), high expectation of prognosis (25%), bad attitude (13.04%), inadequate medical knowledge (7.61%), disturbance (6.52%), poor compliance (3.62%) and mistrust (1.09%). Among all medical disputes, there are 406 cases of level-4 medical disputes (78%), 95 cases of level-3 medical disputes (18%), 19 cases of level-2 medical disputes (4%), and no level-1 medical dispute. Meanwhile, the classification of diseases, treatment effect, doctors' violation of diagnosis and treatment regulation, and low technical level are the reasons for the level differences in medical disputes. Conclusions Factors of doctor in medical disputes in Shanghai mainly include inadequate communication and low technical level while the patient’s factors mainly contain misunderstanding of medical behavior and high expectation of the prognosis. Level-3 and 4 medical disputes take up the major part in all medical disputes. The classification of diseases, treatment effect, doctors' violation of diagnosis and treatment regulation, and doctor’s deficient technical level are high-risk factors requiring critical attention in medical disputes.

IMPLEMENTATION EFFECTIVENESS OF HOSPITAL RESPONSIBILITY TOWARDS MEDICAL DISPUTE PROCESS AT HOSPITAL X CIBINONG

Medical disputes that are rife in the medical world in Indonesia are a separate burden for medical personnel in carrying out daily practices, where the hospital as a place for medical personnel to work, should be responsible for medical personnel involved in medical disputes. The absence of sufficiently clear regulations governing the responsibility of hospitals in resolving medical disputes, makes medical personnel, in this case, the most disadvantaged part. The purpose of this study is to empirically determine the applicable laws and regulations regarding the responsibility of hospitals in the process of resolving medical disputes and the effectiveness of their implementation. The research method used is qualitative research with case study approach. Data sources are primary and secondary data. The data analysis subjects were informants, namely the director of medical services, the legal department officer and the public relations officer. The analysis tool uses interactive analysis. There were at least 4 laws and regulations related to hospital responsibility for medical personnel and implementation of regulations regarding hospital responsibility towards medical dispute process is 88%. The research found no guidelines for handling medical disputes. This study shows that the laws and regulations related to hospital responsibility and their implementation in the medical dispute resolution process have been implemented. The recommendation to Hospital X Cibinong is to make guidelines on the flow of medical dispute handling and provide education about health law to all hospital staff, especially medical personnel as parties most vulnerable to malpractice suits.

Mediation as an Alternative for Settlement of Medical Disputes Between Doctors and Patients in Therapeutic Agreements

The therapeutic transaction agreement is an agreement between a doctor and a patient which is a legal relationship. Therefore, it gives birth to rights and obligations between doctors and patients which have the potential to cause medical disputes between doctors and patients (malpractice). There are two ways to process medical dispute resolution, namely litigation (through court) and non-litigation (outside court). The litigation process is costly and time-consuming, and often results in one party being the winner and the other party being the loser. The protracted process in court causes a lot of sharp criticism of the judiciary when carrying out its functions, therefore it is necessary to improve the judicial system towards being effective and efficient, especially in medical disputes between doctors and patients. So the medical dispute mediation route between doctors and patients can be an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) that is more effective and efficient. The purpose of this study was to analyze the elements of a therapeutic agreement based on contract law in the Civil Code. And Analyzing mediation as an alternative to dispute resolution of therapeutic agreements for doctors and patients. To achieve this objective, research was conducted using normative juridical legal research methods. So this research approach uses the Statute Approach or research approach to legal products, by examining all laws and regulations related to what will be researched.

Implementation of Mediation as an Alternative for Medical Dispute Resolution in Hospitals Based on Law No. 36 of 2009 concerning Health

The Law on Health does not explicitly explain mediation in resolving a dispute between a doctor and a patient, so there are still many disputes that go directly to litigation, so the number of cases piles up in court. The method used in this paper uses a normative legal type method, with a statutory approach, using primary legal materials, by collecting data by literature study, then analyzed using qualitative methods. Disciplinary sanctions imposed on violations of physician discipline as stated in Law No. 29 of 2004 article 69 in the form of a written warning, revocation of the registration certificate or practice license, and the obligation to attend medical or dental education.

Medical Negligence Dispute Resolution in Malaysia: Time for legal reform

As medical negligence has become a public concern today, there is an increasing number of medical negligence claims which commonly settled through litigation. However, numerous problems regarding the practice of litigation have come to light. Hence, the research aims to examine the current medical dispute resolution in Malaysia to find a better solution. The findings show that there are weaknesses and flaws of the existing practice and found that there are other alternative dispute resolutions available and more suitable. Thus, the research provides the grounds for legal reform and makes recommendations for improvement of Malaysia’s medical negligence dispute resolution framework. Keywords: medical negligence; dispute resolutions; Malaysia eISSN: 2398-4287© 2021. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians/Africans/Arabians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia. DOI: