Implementation of Informed Consent and Non-Litigation Medical Dispute Resolution at RSUD Kotapinang: A Juridical Analysis

Abstract

This research explores alternative medical dispute resolution at the Regional General Hospital (RSUD) Kotapinang and the legal status of informed consent in medical practice. Medical dispute resolution can be carried out through two channels: litigation (court) and non-litigation (mediation). RSUD Kotapinang has implemented mediation as a non-litigation dispute resolution method to achieve peace and provide parties the opportunity to express their interests. Although efforts to handle complaints quickly through internal mediators have been made, the implementation of mediation still needs to be adjusted to comply with applicable laws and regulations, including the requirement for mediators to be certified by the Supreme Court.

Informed consent is a crucial element in medical practice because its absence is considered a legal violation known as medical malpractice. Professional responsibility in medicine is based on ethical standards and professional duties, while legal responsibility is related to compliance with applicable regulations. Mistakes in performing professional duties can lead to sanctions from professional bodies, while legal violations can result in lawsuits in court. Therefore, informed consent must fulfill the principles of consensualism and freedom of contract to be valid and binding on the parties involved. This research emphasizes the importance of clear procedures and supporting regulations to ensure the mediation process and informed consent are effective and fair, providing adequate legal protection for patients and medical professionals involved.