Legal Protection for Midwives in the Installation of Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices (IUDs) at Community Health Centers

Santa Lussia Yunica

doi:10.30649/jhek.v1i1.12

Authors

Santa Lussia Yunica Universitas Hang Tuah

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30649/jhek.v1i1.12

Keywords:

IUD, Midwife, Law Protection

Abstract

Increasing population growth can be suppressed through the Family Planning (Keluarga Berencana/KB) program, one of which is the installation of uterine contraceptive devices (IUDs) by midwives at the Puskesmas. Juridically, the midwife has the authority to install an IUD. However, contraceptive failure often occurs, in which midwives can face criminal or civil lawsuits regarding the IUD insertion case. The method in this study is a normative juridical approach to the law (statue approach) and conceptual approach (conceptual approach). Related to the problem of IUD insertion failure, midwives are only responsible for the installation actions according to their competency standards. While the results of failures that may occur can not be accounted for because the transactions that occur between midwives and patients emphasize the maximum effort of the midwife. Minister of Health Regulation No. 28 of 2017 related to the Licensing and Implementation of Midwife Practices that discusses the rights and authority of midwives regarding contraception. To ensure legal certainty, clear regulations regarding the profession of midwife are setout in the Midwifery Law.

References

Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1999 Tentang Perlindungan Konsumen, Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1999 Nomor 42, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 3821.

Undang-Undang Nomor 36 tahun 2014 Tentang Tenaga Kesehatan, Lembaran Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2014 Nomor 298, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor 5607.

Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Nomor 46 Tahun 2013 Tentang Registrasi Tenaga Kesehatan, Berita Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2013 Nomor 977.

Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Republik Indonesia Nomor 28 Tahun 2017 Tentang Izin dan Penyelenggaraan Praktik Bidan.

Keputusan Menteri Kesehatan Nomor 369/Menkes/SK/III/2007, Tentang Standar Profesi Bidan.

Dahlan S. (2002). Hukum Kesehatan Rambu-Rambu bagi Profesi Dokter. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

Leni Syafitri, Faktor-Faktor Yang Berhubungan Dengan Pemanfaatan Pelayanan Kesehatan PITCH Bagi Tahanan dan Warga Binaan Pemasyarakatan Beresiko Tinggi HIV/AIDS di Poliklinik Rutan Kelas I Cipinang, Tesis, Pascasarjana Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, 2012.

Nasution Bahder Johan. (2005). Hukum Kesehatan Pertanggungjawaban Dokter. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Peter Mahmud Marzuki. (2011). Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Penada Media Group.

Philipus M Hadjon. (1984). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Rakyat Indonesia. Surabaya: PT Bina Ilmu.

Reni Heryani. (2011). Buku Ajar Konsep Kebidanan. Jakarta: Trans Info Media.

Soetrisno S. (2010). Malpraktek Medik dan Mediasi Sebagai Alternatif Peneyelesaian Sengketa. Tangeang: Telaga Medika.

Seotiono. (2004). Rule of Law (Supremasi Hukum). Surakarta: Magister Pasca Sarjana Universitas Sebelas Maret.

Toto Tohir Suriatmadja. (2016). Minimalisasi Sengketa Medik Pasien dan Tenaga Kesehatan Dihubungkan dengan Undang-Undang Perlindungan Konsumen. Journal Litigasi, Vol. 16(2), 2015, 3011 – 3034.

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.23969/litigasi.v16i2.45

Wila Chandrawila. (2001). Hukum Kedokteran. Bandung: Mandar Maju.

https://lbhyogyakarta, mediasi non-litigasi. Available online from [Akses 3 Desember 2018].