Revisiting The Legal Implications of Medical Malpractice : A Case Study in Indonesia
##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##
Published
Jul 2, 2025
Abstract
Medical malpractice presents complex legal and ethical challenges in Indonesia and worldwide. This expanded analysis delves into Indonesia’s current malpractice framework – examining how criminal, civil, and professional regulations intersect – and provides a richer discussion of its shortcomings and recent reforms. Comparative case studies from the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, and Sweden offer international perspectives, highlighting a spectrum from faultbased tort litigation to nofault compensation systems. We incorporate relevant data, including claim frequencies and compensation costs, and present tables to contextualize Indonesia’s experience against global trends. Based on these analyses, the discussion proposes specific, actionable reforms for Indonesia, emphasizing improved patient compensation mechanisms, strengthened professional oversight, and legal adjustments to balance deterrence and fairness. The recommendations aim to foster a more coherent, efficient, and just system for addressing medical errors. By integrating comparative insights and evidence, this article provides an academic yet practical roadmap for legal and healthcare stakeholders in Indonesia to reform medical malpractice policy.
##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Hak Cipta :
Penulis yang mempublikasikan manuskripnya di jurnal ini menyetujui ketentuan berikut:
- Hak cipta pada setiap artikel adalah milik penulis.
- Penulis mengakui bahwa Ranah Research : Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development berhak menjadi yang pertama menerbitkan dengan lisensi Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (Attribution 4.0 International CC BY 4.0) .
- Penulis dapat mengirimkan artikel secara terpisah, mengatur distribusi non-eksklusif manuskrip yang telah diterbitkan dalam jurnal ini ke versi lain (misalnya, dikirim ke repositori institusi penulis, publikasi ke dalam buku, dll.), dengan mengakui bahwa manuskrip telah diterbitkan pertama kali di Ranah Research.
References
Anderson, R. E. (1999). Billions for defense: The pervasive nature of defensive medicine. Archives of Internal Medicine, 159(20), 2399–2402.
Bismark, M. M., & Paterson, R. J. (2006). Nofault compensation in New Zealand: Harmonizing injury compensation, provider accountability, and patient safety. Health Affairs, 25(1), 278–283.
Brennan, T. A., et al. (2004). Incidence of adverse events and negligence in hospitalized patients: Results of the Harvard Medical Practice Study I. New England Journal of Medicine, 324(6), 370–376.
Chandra, A., Nundy, S., & Seghal, R. (2017). Improving patient safety and reducing medical errors in developing countries. Journal of Patient Safety and Risk Management, 22(3), 105–110.
Cochrane Collaboration. (2019). Patient safety and litigation systems: International evidence. Cochrane Database.
Danzon, P. M. (1985). Medical malpractice: Theory, evidence, and public policy. Harvard University Press.
Furrow, B. R., Greaney, T. L., Johnson, S. H., Jost, T. S., & Schwartz, R. L. (2018). Health law: Cases, materials and problems (8th ed.). West Academic.
Ginsburg, P. B. (2005). Defensive medicine: Evidence, causes, and solutions. Health Affairs, 24(4), 103–111.
Ham, C., & Alberti, K. G. M. M. (2002). The medical malpractice crisis: What can we learn from the UK? British Medical Journal, 324(7334), 1036–1038.
Ives, J. (2015). Medical ethics, law, and communication at a glance. WileyBlackwell.
Japan Medical Safety Investigation System. (2016). Annual report on medical accident investigations. Tokyo: Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare.
Kong, X., Yang, Y., & Yan, W. (2022). Medical malpractice litigation trends in China: An empirical study from 2008 to 2017. BMJ Open, 12, e052447.
Löf Insurance Company. (2023). Annual statistics on patient injury claims in Sweden. Retrieved from https://lof.se
Mello, M. M., Studdert, D. M., & Brennan, T. A. (2003). The new medical malpractice crisis. New England Journal of Medicine, 348(23), 2281–2284.
Ministry of Health, Republic of Indonesia. (2023). Law No. 17 of 2023 on Health. Jakarta: Government of Indonesia.
NHS Resolution. (2024). Annual report and accounts 2023/24. London: UK Government.
OECD. (2017). Tackling harmful medical practice and promoting patient safety. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Paterson, R. J. (2010). The good doctor: What patients, doctors, and medical boards should know about medical regulation. Auckland University Press.
Peto, T. (2019). A comparative study of nofault medical injury compensation schemes. Health Law Review, 27(1), 4–13.
Reuters. (2024). Indonesia court finds drugmakers at fault over toxic syrup. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com
Studdert, D. M., Mello, M. M., Gawande, A. A., Gandhi, T. K., Kachalia, A., Yoon, C., Puopolo, A. L., & Brennan, T. A. (2006). Claims, errors, and compensation payments in medical malpractice litigation. New England Journal of Medicine, 354(19), 2024–2033.
Studdert, D. M., Mello, M. M., Sage, W. M., DesRoches, C. M., Peugh, J., Zapert, K., & Brennan, T. A. (2005). Defensive medicine among highrisk specialist physicians in a volatile malpractice environment. JAMA, 293(21), 2609–2617.
Swedish Patient Claims Panel. (2022). Annual review of patient compensation cases. Stockholm: Ministry of Health and Social Affairs.
Tingle, J., & Cribb, A. (2013). Nursing law and ethics (4th ed.). WileyBlackwell.
WHO. (2018). Patient safety and legal accountability: Global perspectives. Geneva: World Health Organization.
Wiener, C. (2001). The politics of medical malpractice: The U.S. and international perspectives. Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics, 1(1), 57–85.