Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
ABSTRACT
Skripsi ini membahas tentang tanggung jawab dokter, rumah sakit dan pemerintah apabila terjadi pembiaran medik dalam keadaan gawat darurat yang dialami oleh pasien yang didasarkan atas literatur, perundang-undangan, hasil wawancara dengan dokter, direktur rumah sakit dan pemerintah, dengan analisis putusan No. 38/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Bna. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian dengan bentuk penelitian yuridis normatif dan tipe penelitian deskriptif dengan analisis data secara kualitatif yang mana penelitian ini menjelaskan mengenai klasifikasi dan pengaturan keadaan gawat darurat menurut Hukum Kesehatan, dan tanggung jawab Rumah Sakit, Dokter dan Pemerintah dalam pelayanan gawat darurat serta menganalisis tanggung jawab hukum Rumah Sakit, Dokter, dan Pemerintah apabila terjadi pembiaran medik terhadap pasien gawat darurat dengan analisis Putusan No. 38/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Bna. Hasil penelitian ini adalah 1) di Indonesia sudah dikenal klasifikasi penanganan gawat darurat dan pengaturan gawat darurat sudah cukup baik, 2) tanggung jawab pelayanan gawat darurat oleh dokter diatur dalam UU No. 29/2004, Rumah Sakit diatur dalam UU No. 44/2009 serta Pemeritah memiliki tanggung jawab dalam pembinaan dan pengawasan terhadap dokter dan rumah sakit, 3) penulis tidak sepenuhnya sependapat dengan putusan Majelis Hakim No. 38/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Bna.Penulis menyarankan  kepada Rumah Sakit untuk memperketat dalam mengawasi dan mempekerjakan dokter, kepada Pemerintah untuk melakukan judicial review Pasal 190 UU No. 36/2009, kepada Pemerintah untuk membuat peraturan pelaksana atau penjelasan Pasal 42 ayat (2) UU No. 44/2009, dan kepada Pemerintah dalam tugas mengurus dan mengatur untuk melakukan penegakan hukum terhadap tanggung jawab yang dimiliki oleh Pemerintah.

---

ABSTRACT
This thesis discusses the responsibility of doctors, hospitals, and the government when medical abondonment occurs in emergency situations experienced by patients based on lit literature, legislation, interviews with hospitals, doctors and government, with an verdict analysis of No. 38/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Bna. This study uses a research method with normative juridical research and descriptive research type with qualitative data analysis in which this study describes the classification and regulation of emergency conditions according to Health Law, and the responsibilities of Hospitals, Doctors and Government in emergency services, and also analyze the legal responsibilities of Hospitals, Doctors and Governent if medical abondonment occurs to emergency patients with an verdict analysis of No. 38/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Bna. The results of this study are 1) that in Indonesia it is well known that the classification of emergency treatment and emergency regulation is quite good, 2) the responsibility of emergency services by doctors is regulated in Law No. 29/2004, Hospitals are regulated in Law No. 44/2009 and the Government has responsibility in fostering and supervising doctors and hospitals, 3) the author does not fully agree with the verdict of Judges No. 38/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Bna. The author recommends to the Hospital to tighten in supervising and hiring doctors, to the Government to conduct a judicial review of Article 190 of Law No. 36/2009, to the Government to make implementing regulations or explanation of Article 42 paragraph (2) of Law No. 44/2009, and to the Government in the task of managing and regulating to enforce the law on responsibilities held by the Government.

Abstrak :
ABSTRACT
Penelitian ini membahas tentang pembiaran medik dan keselamatan pasien dalam Putusan No. 381/Pid.B/2014/PN.Tk. Putusan tersebut dikategorikan sebagai pembiaran medik yaitu apabila pimpinan fasilitas pelayanan kesehatan dan/atau tenaga kesehatan tidak memberikan pertolongan pertama dalam keadaan gawat darurat. Dalam kasus tersebut pihak rumah sakit tidak termasuk pembiaran medik dalam hukum kesehatan. Pihak RSUD. Dr. A. Dadi Tjokro Dipo Bandar Lampung tidak memenuhi tujuh standar keselamatan pasien yang terdapat dalam Permenkes No.1691.Menkes/Per/VIII/2011 tentang Keselamatan Pasien Rumah Sakit sehingga pihak rumah sakit dapat dikenakan sanksi berupa teguran tertulis, terguran lisan, penundaan atau penanggahan perpanjangan izin operasional. Metode penelitian yang digunakan pada skripsi saya adalah yuridis normatif. Saran dari penelitian : 1 . Untuk pemerintah agar dapat mengawasi dengan ketat prosedur pelayanan rumah sakit seperti halnya adanya Badan Pengawas Rumah Sakit Indonesia yang salah tugasnya adalah mengawasi hak dan kewajiban pasien sehingga kasus yang menimpa pasien Suparman tidak terulang kembali. 2 . Untuk pemerintah juga agar dapat membuat peraturan mengenai pembiaran medik yang lebih luas di dalam luang lingkup hukum kesehatan sehingga pengaturan mengenai pembiaran medik di dalam hukum kesehatan tidak hanya mengenai pertolongan pertama pada keadaan gawat darurat saja. 3 .Terhadap pihak rumah sakit agar memberikan sosialisasi mengenai Keselamatan Pasien Rumah Sakit terutama Tujuh Standar Keselamatan Pasien Rumah Sakit yang terdapat dalam Permenkes No.1691.Menkes/Per/VIII/2011 tentang Keselamatan Pasien Rumah Sakit.

---

ABSTRACT
This research examines medical negligence and patient rsquo s safety in Verdict No. 381 Pid.B 2014 PN.Tk. The mentioned verdict is categorized as medical negligence, which means the head of healthcare facility and or medical workers do not give a first aid treatment in an emergency situation. In the case, the hospital did not do any medical negligence according to medical law. Public hospital RSUD. Dr. A. Dadi Tjokro Dipo Bandar Lampung did not fulfill the seven standard of patient rsquo s safety as stipulated in the Ordinance of the Health Minister No.1691.Menkes Per VIII 2011 about Safety of Hospital rsquo s Patient, hence the hospital could be penalized by giving them oral warning, delay or suspension of operational permission extension. Research method that is used in this thesis is normative juridical method. This thesis suggest 1 . The government should keep an eye close to hospital rsquo s service procedure through Indonesian Hospital Supervising Body, which have the authority to supervise the rights and obligations of patients so that the Suparman case will not happen again 2 . For the government also to make regulations on broader medical broadcasting within the scope of health law so that the regulation of medical neglect in health law is not only about first aid in emergencies 3 . Hospital have to give socialization about the Safety of Hospital rsquo s Patient. Particularly, the Seven Standards of the Safety of Hospital rsquo s Patient, which are stipulated in the Ordinance of the Health Minister No.1691.Menkes Per VIII 2011 about Safety of Hospital rsquo s Patient. hence the hospital could be penalized by giving them oral warning, delay or suspension of operational permission extension. Research method that is used in this thesis is normative juridical method. This thesis suggest 1 . The government should keep an eye close to hospital rsquo s service procedure through Indonesian Hospital Supervising Body, which have the authority to supervise the rights and obligations of patients so that the Suparman case will not happen again 2 . For the government also to make regulations on broader medical broadcasting within the scope of health law so that the regulation of medical neglect in health law is not only about first aid in emergencies 3 . Hospital have to give socialization about the Safety of Hospital rsquo s Patient. Particularly, the Seven Standards of the Safety of Hospital rsquo s Patient, which are stipulated in the Ordinance of the Health Minister No.1691.Menkes Per VIII 2011 about Safety of Hospital rsquo s Patient.