<![CDATA[This study analyzes the legal responsibility of RSUD dr. Rasidin Padang in providing health services to patients in emergency conditions, with the Desi Erianti case as the principal case study. The study was motivated by the importance of emergency services in protecting patient safety and by empirical concerns regarding response time, communication, administrative procedures, and perceived differences in service between National Health Insurance (BPJS) and general patients. The research employed an empirical juridical approach with a qualitative descriptive analysis. Primary data were obtained through a questionnaire involving 54 respondents who had experience receiving services at RSUD dr. Rasidin Padang, while secondary data were obtained through legal and literature studies and relevant documents. The analysis compared empirical findings with the applicable legal framework concerning patient rights, hospital obligations, emergency services, negligence, and civil liability. The findings indicate that hospital services generally operate, but several aspects require improvement, particularly response speed, communication by health workers, administrative procedures, and perceptions of service equality. In the Desi Erianti case, there are issues concerning the assessment of emergency status and the service process. Nevertheless, the available evidence is insufficient to conclusively establish medical negligence or a causal relationship between hospital services and the patient's death because the researcher did not obtain full access to the medical record and internal medical audit. Therefore, hospital liability cannot be imposed solely on the basis of patient dissatisfaction or an adverse outcome. Civil liability requires proof of an unlawful act, fault or negligence, loss, and causation.]]>
