Article 66 verse (3) Act 29/2004 about Medical Practice could prompt uncertainty for the doctors to undergo their duties and may spur defensive medicine, a circumstance of medical practice that puts the doctors to play safe to shun from patient’s blaming.  

Chief of Indonesian Doctors Association (IDI) Zaenal Abidin said that a doctor has ethical and professional obligatory in giving medical service. The obligatory drives the doctor to do the best in helping patient, regardless of the critical measurement whether the patient is having a hope or not. Recent condition is considered dilemmatic for the doctors. Doctors are most likely be the object of anger to any patient’s disappointment. The trial, conducted at MK Plenary Room, Thursday (9/4), was led by Deputy Chief Justice Arief Hidayat.

According to him, a state shall give a protection to the doctors within Act Medical Doctor, aside from just be giving protection to the patient. “After what we have experienced, the Act stimulates a choir of sues to the doctors instead, our position is now fragile, easily sued and being blamed,” Rizal said.  

By the ruling of the Act, some doctors might execute defensive medicine which actually disadvantages people, by such execution doctors may only serve patient who is having bigger life chance than the lower one. Doctors also may operate unnecessary full medical check-up to the patient, which most likely ends up in big payment. Lastly, doctors may refuse to check a patient due the lacking medical facility. Meanwhile, referring a patient to another hospital may lead to late medical action.   

Therefore, IDI asked MK to give a legal settlement about special procedure to asses medical practice, within tiered assessment, starts from ethical and disciplinary assessment in MKEK and MKDKI. “If MKEK and MKDKI apparently found a wrongdoing indication, then the case shall be reported to the Police or Court,” he added.     

Synchronizing

Deputy Chief of Indonesian Medical Discipline Honorary Assembly (MKDKI) Sabir Alwy said that there are three aspects to be enforced in medical practice, ethical enforcement, medical science enforcement, and Act-based legal enforcement.  

In accordance to the medical infringement, MKDKI sees that infringement split into two. The first is a purposed action to assassinate or to damage the patient. “This is plain a crime context. Not a malpractice or else,” he said.

Moreover, there is a second infringement, committed after unhandy medical standard and procedures “MKDKI is competent to handle only the second context,” he added.

Related to Article 66 verse (3) Act of Medical Practice, Sabir said that it is necessary to synchronize the law to the execution to shun overlapping procedures. Anything decided by MKDKI is not automatically violation, due to the different parameter. According to MKDKI, Article 66 verse (3) retains that process in MKDKI is disciplinary action. Somehow, legal action must be applied as well. “However, the Synchronizing needs to be executed so the process will generate objective result,” he explained. (Lulu Hanifah/mh)