Research Article
Juridical Analysis of The Obligations of The Indonesian Medical Disciplinary Board in Resolving Complaints of Patient Losses
@INPROCEEDINGS{10.4108/eai.30-10-2021.2315739, author={Istiana Sari and Megawati Barthos}, title={Juridical Analysis of The Obligations of The Indonesian Medical Disciplinary Board in Resolving Complaints of Patient Losses}, proceedings={Proceedings of the First Multidiscipline International Conference, MIC 2021, October 30 2021, Jakarta, Indonesia}, publisher={EAI}, proceedings_a={MIC}, year={2022}, month={1}, keywords={obligation; professional discipline; doctor; indonesian medical disciplinary board (imdb)}, doi={10.4108/eai.30-10-2021.2315739} }- Istiana Sari
Megawati Barthos
Year: 2022
Juridical Analysis of The Obligations of The Indonesian Medical Disciplinary Board in Resolving Complaints of Patient Losses
MIC
EAI
DOI: 10.4108/eai.30-10-2021.2315739
Abstract
In Law No.29 of 2004 concerning Medical Practice in Indonesia, Indonesian Medical Disciplinary Board (IMDB) is assigned as an autonomous organization approved to decide mistakes in the utilization of clinical disciplines did by specialists and dental specialists. The obligations of IMDB needs to be initiated in order to optimize the tasks of the IMDB and resolving complaints about patient losses. This IMDB obligation need to be initiated because the absence of regulation regarding IMDB obligation causes the independence of the IMDB become a public problem that is widely questioned. This in turn will potentially make IMDB able to act arbitrarily and if it were a super body. In addition, IMDB is often giddy and acts beyond its authority because IMDB is not exposed to the spirit of a balance of rights and obligations. The regulation of the IMDB’s obligations for the settlement of complaints about patient losses has not been comprehensively regulated in the existing regulatory instruments. The legitimate situation of the Indonesian Medical Disciplinary Board's choice with regards to implementing disciplinary approvals on the clinical calling on specialists and dental specialists has not been obviously and unambiguously depicted comparable to lawful.
