Legal Responsibility For Operational Failures Through Robotic Telesurgery
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58812/wsis.v2i09.1306Keywords:
Legal Responsibility, Robotic Telesurgery, Health SectorAbstract
Technological developments, especially in the health sector, are currently growing very rapidly. Robotic Telesurgery or remote surgical robots are expected to become a technology that can realize health equality in Indonesia, but it is a shame that technological progress is not comparable to the relevant regulations that regulate it, it is feared that this will not guarantee legal certainty which could lead to malpractice. The method used in this research is a normative legal research method because the focus of the study departs from the vagueness of norms using the approach: statute approach, conceptual approach, as well as analytical approach. The legal material search technique uses document study techniques, and study analysis uses qualitative analysis. The results of this research are that there is a void in norms in Law Number 17 of 2023 concerning Health which does not regulate legal responsibility for failed operations through Robotic Telesurgery So it is necessary to create a law that specifically regulates the responsibilities of doctors.
References
W. Rogowski, “Current impact of gene technology on healthcare: a map of economic assessments,” Health Policy (New. York)., vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 340–357, 2007.
H. Alemzadeh, J. Raman, N. Leveson, Z. Kalbarczyk, and R. K. Iyer, “Adverse events in robotic surgery: a retrospective study of 14 years of FDA data,” PLoS One, vol. 11, no. 4, p. e0151470, 2016.
V. Patel et al., “Technical and ethical considerations in telesurgery,” J. Robot. Surg., vol. 18, no. 1, p. 40, 2024.
S. O’Sullivan et al., “Legal, regulatory, and ethical frameworks for development of standards in artificial intelligence (AI) and autonomous robotic surgery,” Int. J. Med. Robot. Comput. Assist. Surg., vol. 15, no. 1, p. e1968, 2019.
T. Rexhouse, “Telesurgery: An Integrated Legal-Bioethical Approach,” Alb. LJ Sci. Tech., vol. 32, p. 316, 2021.
A. Mavroforou, E. Michalodimitrakis, C. Hatzitheofilou, and A. Giannoukas, “Legal and ethical issues in robotic surgery,” Int. Angiol., vol. 29, no. 1, p. 75, 2010.
E. Fosch-Villaronga, P. Khanna, H. Drukarch, and B. Custers, “The role of humans in surgery automation: Exploring the influence of automation on human–robot interaction and responsibility in surgery innovation,” Int. J. Soc. Robot., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 563–580, 2023.
A. Villanueva, “The legal battle with the future of autonomous surgical robotics,” Ind. Heal. L. Rev., vol. 17, p. 367, 2020.
A. Yani, “Utilization of technology in the health of community health,” Promot. J. Kesehat. Masy., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 97–103, 2018.
J. Marescaux et al., “Transcontinental robot-assisted remote telesurgery: feasibility and potential applications,” Ann. Surg., vol. 235, no. 4, pp. 487–492, 2002.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Ni Putu Eka Madeni Apriliani, I Nyoman Bagiastra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.