{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1207317,
        "msgid": "ri-no-stranger-to-consequences-of-malpractice-1447893297",
        "date": "1995-10-22 00:00:00",
        "title": "RI no stranger to consequences of malpractice",
        "author": null,
        "source": "JP:ALS",
        "tags": null,
        "topic": null,
        "summary": "RI no stranger to consequences of malpractice JAKARTA (JP): Malpractice can occur anywhere. At an isolated Puskesmas community health center, at a sophisticated, expensive clinic, in the examination room of a private doctor, or in a state-owned hospital. Press reports since the early 1980s prove it can also occur during any medical treatment, from complicated surgery to easy diagnoses.",
        "content": "<p>RI no stranger to consequences of malpractice<\/p>\n<p>JAKARTA (JP): Malpractice can occur anywhere. At an isolated<br>\nPuskesmas community health center, at a sophisticated, expensive<br>\nclinic, in the examination room of a private doctor, or in a<br>\nstate-owned hospital.<\/p>\n<p>Press reports since the early 1980s prove it can also occur<br>\nduring any medical treatment, from complicated surgery to easy<br>\ndiagnoses.<\/p>\n<p>Setianingrum, who worked at a community health center in<br>\nWedarijaksa, Central Java, was charged with negligence which led<br>\nto the death of her patient, Rukmini Kartono, in 1982. Rukmini<br>\nwas allergic to the streptomycin injection Setianingrum gave her.<\/p>\n<p>The Pati regency court decided Setianingrum was guilty and<br>\ngave her a suspended sentence. Setianingrum appealed but failed<br>\nto prove her innocence. Later, the Supreme Court nullified her<br>\nsentence, saying she was not negligent.<\/p>\n<p>In 1986 the town of Sukabumi in West Java was jolted by the<br>\nalleged malpractice of ophthalmologist G.M. Husaini. The doctor<br>\nwas sued by Muhidin and Opa bin Tuhi, after both had their a<br>\npupil removed.<\/p>\n<p>Muhidin and Opa both said the doctor told them they had to<br>\nhave surgery to cure eye infections, but didn't tell them their<br>\npupils would be removed.<\/p>\n<p>Husaini defended himself, saying that the pupils were removed<br>\nto cure the infection. Later, he sued his patients for tainting<br>\nhis name.<\/p>\n<p>Eye surgery was also the beginning of suffering for Andriani<br>\nin 1986. The eye operation at the Aini Eye Hospital in South<br>\nJakarta was a success, but Andriani, who was five at the time,<br>\nsuffered brain damage from the anesthesia. The Medical Ethics<br>\nCouncil examined the case and found that the anesthesiologist<br>\nleft the operating room before the surgery finished.<\/p>\n<p>In 1987 the Ministry of Health revoked the Asih Trisna<br>\nclinic's operating permit because of the death of Sulastri. The<br>\npatient underwent abdominal liposuction and vaginoplasty at the<br>\nclinic on Feb. 3 that year. She was rushed to the Husada hospital<br>\nin Central Jakarta and died the next day from hemorrhaging. It<br>\nwas revealed that the team of doctors responsible for the<br>\noperation were unqualified and that the clinic didn't have a<br>\npermit to perform major surgery or even admit patients.<\/p>\n<p>In 1988, in Medan, North Sumatra, July was told by Rustam, the<br>\ndoctor in charge at Permata Bunda hospital, a day before her<br>\nbaby's birth that it was healthy and in good condition. The next<br>\nday it was stillborn. Her husband Hansen sued after discovering<br>\nthe stillborn had a broken neck, peeling skin and swollen<br>\ntesticles.<\/p>\n<p>\"Dead or alive is God's intention, but why was my baby's neck<br>\nbroken?\" Hansen was quoted by Jakarta-Jakarta weekly in August,<br>\n1988 as asking.<\/p>\n<p>He said if there was an abnormality, the doctor should have<br>\ntold them the day before the birth so an operation could have<br>\nbeen performed.<\/p>\n<p>Doctor Rustam said that the baby had died while still in the<br>\nwomb from abnormalities. The doctor said the broken neck was<br>\ncaused by the mother's small pelvis, which made delivery tough.<\/p>\n<p>There were no reports of the outcome of the case.<\/p>\n<p>In March 1993, the Atma Jaya private hospital in North Jakarta<br>\nfaced a malpractice charge by Suwito, a resident of Penjaringan<br>\ndistrict in North Jakarta. He told the police that Haryanto, his<br>\n10-month-old baby, had died at the hospital from what he believed<br>\nwas a malpractice. He said his child had been hospital for two<br>\ndays because of a \"high temperature\" and had died after receiving<br>\nan \"injection\".<\/p>\n<p>The police, however, believe that what Suwito actually meant<br>\nwas that his child had died after receiving an infusion.<\/p>\n<p>The case was later handled by the Jakarta office of the<br>\nMinistry of Health after the management of the hospital denied<br>\nthat Haryanto's death was the result of a malpractice. (als)<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/ri-no-stranger-to-consequences-of-malpractice-1447893297",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}