PELINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PASIEN DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA MEDIS MELALUI PENGADILAN (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN PENGADILAN NEGERI JAKARTA SELATAN NOMOR 538/Pdt.G/2016/PN. Jkt. Sel)

Humaira, Rezka Zahra (2019) PELINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PASIEN DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA MEDIS MELALUI PENGADILAN (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN PENGADILAN NEGERI JAKARTA SELATAN NOMOR 538/Pdt.G/2016/PN. Jkt. Sel). Other thesis, UNIKA SOEGIJAPRANATA SEMARANG.

[img] Text (COVER)
16.C2.0012 REZKA ZAHRA H., S.S.T (9.53)..pdf COVER.pdf

Download (903kB)
[img] Text (BAB I)
16.C2.0012 REZKA ZAHRA H., S.S.T (9.53)..pdf BAB I.pdf

Download (494kB)
[img] Text (BAB II)
16.C2.0012 REZKA ZAHRA H., S.S.T (9.53)..pdf BAB II.pdf
Restricted to Registered users only

Download (593kB)
[img] Text (BAB III)
16.C2.0012 REZKA ZAHRA H., S.S.T (9.53)..pdf BAB III.pdf

Download (469kB)
[img] Text (BAB IV)
16.C2.0012 REZKA ZAHRA H., S.S.T (9.53)..pdf BAB IV.pdf

Download (251kB)
[img] Text (DAFTAR PUSTAKA)
16.C2.0012 REZKA ZAHRA H., S.S.T (9.53)..pdf DAPUS.pdf

Download (254kB)
[img] Text (LAMPIRAN)
16.C2.0012 REZKA ZAHRA H., S.S.T (9.53)..pdf LAMP.pdf

Download (2MB)

Abstract

One of in court mediation failure cases was the case of the South Jakarta District Court Nr.538/Pdt.G/2016/PN. Jkt. Sel. The objective of this study was to determine judges’ legal considerations in making decision relating with the South Jakarta District Court case and to know the legal protection to the patient in resolving the medical disputes which was conducted through the court. This study used a legal-normative approach having descriptive analytical specification. The data used were primary and secondary meanwhile the data gathering techniques were by interviews and library studies. The interviews were conducted with informants, namely one judge of South Jakarta State Court, two judges of Semarang District Court, one Deputy Civil Registrar of the Supreme Court and deputy chairman of MKEK. The library studies were conducted by studying primar, secondary and tertiary legal materials beside some other relevant written materials. The results of this study showed that the plaintiff, in this case was the patient, was not legally protected when having a medical dispute case in the court. It was because the judge was not right in making a judgment. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit directly to the court in order to be able to resolve the case of facelift operation alleged malpractice. However, the plaintiff's claim was not accepted because according to the judges a medical dispute between doctors and patients should be done through Medical Ethics Commission Assembly (MKEK) first. This consideration is based on Circular Letter of Supreme Court (SEMA) 1982 (without numbers) and expert opinion. However, if it used an analogy of MKEK which was treated equal to MKDKI, the submission of a medical dispute claim did not require to be processed through MKEK first. One of the reasons of the judge's irrelevance in the decision was the fact that SEMA used as the basis of the judge’s decision could not be found, even after being confirmed at the Supreme Court's Law and Public Relations Bureau. Besides, there had been many legislations that could be used as considerations of the decision such as the Act Nr. 36 of 2009, the Act Nr. 29 of 2004, and the Act Nr. 44 of 2009. Keywords: legal protection of patients, medical dispute resolution, court decision, MKEK.

Item Type: Thesis (Other)
Subjects: 300 Social Sciences > 340 Law > 345 Criminal law > Medical Law
300 Social Sciences > 340 Law > 346 Private Law > Law Protection
Divisions: Graduate Program in Master of Law
Depositing User: Mr Lucius Oentoeng
Date Deposited: 16 Oct 2019 02:49
Last Modified: 16 Oct 2019 02:49
URI: http://repository.unika.ac.id/id/eprint/19801

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item