Ethical Dimensions and Legal Framework in Service Systems: Rights, Obligations, and Business Practices

Syahrial Syahrial; Maya Intan Pratiwi; Samsurijal Hasan; Carlos Barreto

doi:10.17977/jabe.v10i4.63090

Ethical Dimensions and Legal Framework in Service Systems: Rights, Obligations, and Business Practices

Syahrial Syahrial, Maya Intan Pratiwi, Samsurijal Hasan, Carlos Barreto

Abstract

This research analyzes the integration of ethical dimensions and legal frameworks within digital healthcare service delivery systems in the era of medical technology transformation. The research used a qualitative methodology with a case study design, performed in XXX City, and included 28 participants including healthcare staff, patients, system administrators, and health legislation specialists. Data was collected via in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, and non-participant observation, thereafter analyzed using thematic analysis. The theoretical foundation of the study is based on the integration of principlism theory, rights-based theory, the technology acceptance model, healthcare economics theory, and sustainable business model theory. The study's findings indicate that the implementation of digital health technology faces considerable challenges in balancing operational efficiency with the protection of patient rights. The findings identify five new dimensions of service provider obligations: digital competence, data management, digital communication, lifelong learning, and digital equity. An analysis of sustainable business methods reveals a tension between profitability, accessibility, and service quality. The research emphasizes the need to redefine patient rights in the digital age, create a comprehensive regulatory framework, and adopt a holistic approach to sustainability that includes the triple bottom line. In Indonesia, including multicultural perspectives, especially Islamic values via the concepts of maslaha and Maqasid Shariah, is essential for developing an ethical and sustainable digital health system.

Keywords

ethical dimension, legal framework, digital healthcare and technology, sustainability, provider obligations.

References

Abdelwahed, N. A. A., Bano, S., Al Doghan, M. A., Aljughiman, A. A., Shah, N., & Soomro, B. A. (2024). Empowering women through digital technology: Unraveling the nexus between digital enablers, entrepreneurial orientation and innovations. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 44(5), pp. 602–626. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EDI-02-2024-0072

Abdullah, H. (2025). Developing employee motivation index: McClelland and Maqasid Shariah. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, 16(1), pp. 218–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JIABR-07-2023-0235

Abdullah, H., Mohammed Foziah, N. H., Shahid, M. K., Mohd Fadhil, N. F., Ngah, A. H., & Abdullah, A. M. (2025). Faith and sustainability: Developing Maqasid Shariah-based elderly care organization empowerment index. Quality in Ageing and Older Adults. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/QAOA-02-2025-0018

Akmal, Z. (2024). Digital rights and women's empowerment in Pakistan: An analysis of contemporary Islamic legal perspectives in the age of social media. Milrev Metro Islamic Law Review, 3(1), pp. 95–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.32332/milrev.v3i1.8642

Akramov, J. (2024). The level of implementing AI and its framework for creating structured strategy for corporations. In Proceedings of the 2024 4th International Conference on Advance Computing and Innovative Technologies in Engineering (ICACITE 2024) (pp. 1583–1587). IEEE. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICACITE60783.2024.10617232

Alotaibi, N. H., Dasuki, S., & Zamani, E. D. (2024). M-government and Saudi women's empowerment: A capability approach perspective. Information Technology for Development, 0(0), pp. 1–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2024.2439285

Arrow, K. J. (1978). Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care. In Uncertainty in economics (pp. 345–375). Elsevier.

Azmin Shompa, Z., Akbar, M. A., & Mohd Mohadis, H. (2024). Harmonizing Maqasid al-Shari'ah with sustainable waste management practices: A conceptual framework for principles and implementation. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 18(1), pp. 142–165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IMEFM-02-2024-0061

Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (2019). Principles of biomedical ethics: Marking its fortieth anniversary. The American Journal of Bioethics, 19(11), pp. 9–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2019.1665402

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2023). Thematic analysis. In F. Maggino (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 7187–7193). Springer International Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17299-1_3470

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), pp. 319–340.

Elkington, J. (2018). 25 years ago I coined the phrase "triple bottom line." Here's why it's time to rethink it. Harvard Business Review.

Esmaeilzadeh, P. (2024). Challenges and strategies for wide-scale artificial intelligence (AI) deployment in healthcare practices: A perspective for healthcare organizations. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 151, pp. 1–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2024.102861

Garattini, L., & Padula, A. (2019). Competition in health markets: Is something rotten? Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 112(1), pp. 6–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0141076818816935

Garavand, A., Mohseni, M., Asadi, H., Etemadi, M., Moradi-Joo, M., & Moosavi, A. (2016). Factors influencing the adoption of health information technologies: A systematic review. Electronic Physician, 8(8), pp. 2713–2718. http://dx.doi.org/10.19082/2713

Georgiadou, E. (2021). Towards a multidimensional self-assessment for software process improvement: A pilot tool. Communications in Computer and Information Science, 1442, pp. 164–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85521-5_12

Gianni, R. (2018). Responsible research and innovation: From concepts and practices. Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315457291

Hajli, N., Baydarova, I., & Nisar, T. (2025). Digital entrepreneurial ecosystem: The role of the sharing economy in driving innovation. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 37(5–6), pp. 785–815. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2024.2444908

Holden, R. J., & Karsh, B.-T. (2010). The technology acceptance model: Its past and its future in health care. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 43(1), pp. 159–172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2009.07.002

Ibrahim, A. M., Abdel-Aziz, H. R., Mohamed, H. A. H., Zaghamir, D. E. F., Wahba, N. M. I., Hassan, G. A., Shaban, M., EL-Nablaway, M., Aldughmi, O. N., & Aboelola, T. H. (2024). Balancing confidentiality and care coordination: Challenges in patient privacy. BMC Nursing, 23(1), pp. 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02231-1

Ikejimba, O. (2022). Corporate social responsibility in hospitality industry: A humanistic perspective. In Humanism in business series (pp. 247–268). Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95585-4_13

Khodayari, M., Akbari, M., & Foroudi, P. (2025). The sharing economy: A systematic literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 49(1), pp. 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.70010

Kiseleva, A., Kotzinos, D., & De Hert, P. (2022). Transparency of AI in healthcare as a multilayered system of accountabilities: Between legal requirements and technical limitations. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 5, pp. 1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.879603

Kumar, D. (2025). The ethical and regulatory challenges of consumer privacy in the digital era. In AI marketing and ethical considerations in consumer engagement (pp. 173–194). IGI Global. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-3476-9.ch009

Mehlich, J. (2018). Chemistry and dual use: From scientific integrity to social responsibility. Helvetica Chimica Acta, 101(9), pp. 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hlca.201800098

Montel, L., Ssenyonga, N., Coleman, M. P., & Allemani, C. (2022). How should implementation of the human right to health be assessed? A scoping review of the public health literature from 2000 to 2021. International Journal for Equity in Health, 21(1), pp. 1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12939-022-01742-0

Naamati-Schneider, L., Arazi-Fadlon, M., & Daphna-Tekoah, S. (2024). Navigating moral and ethical dilemmas in digital transformation processes within healthcare organizations. DIGITAL HEALTH, 10, pp. 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20552076241260416

Nair, M., Svedberg, P., Larsson, I., & Nygren, J. M. (2024). A comprehensive overview of barriers and strategies for AI implementation in healthcare: Mixed-method design. PLOS ONE, 19(8), pp. 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305949

Nascimento, I. J. B. do, Abdulazeem, H. M., Weerasekara, I., Marquez, J., Vasanthan, L. T., Deeken, G., Morgan, R., Tan, H.-L., Aguirre, I. Y., Østeengaard, L., Kularathne, I., Azzopardi-Muscat, N., Kessel, R. van, Martinez, E. Z., Permanand, G., & Novillo-Ortiz, D. (2025). Transforming women's health, empowerment, and gender equality with digital health: Evidence-based policy and practice. The Lancet Digital Health, 7(6), pp. 1–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landig.2025.01.014

Page, K. (2012). The four principles: Can they be measured and do they predict ethical decision making? BMC Medical Ethics, 13, pp. 1–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-13-10

Peled-Raz, M. (2017). Human rights in patient care and public health—A common ground. Public Health Reviews, 38(1), pp. 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40985-017-0075-2

Savitz, A. (2013). The triple bottom line: How today's best-run companies are achieving economic, social and environmental success—and how you can too. John Wiley & Sons.

Sayles, J. (2024). Principles of AI governance and model risk management: Master the techniques for ethical and transparent AI systems. Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/979-8-8688-0983-5

Siala, H., & Wang, Y. (2022). SHIFTing artificial intelligence to be responsible in healthcare: A systematic review. Social Science & Medicine, 296, pp. 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114782

Tang, Y. (2024). Privacy protection framework for open data: Constructing and assessing an effective approach. Library and Information Science Research, 46(3), pp. 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2024.101312

Turker, D. (2016). Islamic roots of corporate social responsibility. In CSR, sustainability, ethics and governance (pp. 133–144). Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28287-9_10

Vergunst, F., Berry, H. L., Rugkåsa, J., Burns, T., Molodynski, A., & Maughan, D. L. (2020). Applying the triple bottom line of sustainability to healthcare research: A feasibility study. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 32(1), pp. 48–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzz049

Wagner-Tsukamoto, S. (2019). In search of ethics: From Carroll to integrative CSR economics. Social Responsibility Journal, 15(4), pp. 469–491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-09-2017-0188

World Health Organization. (2023). Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health. WHO Regional Office for South-East Asia. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240029200

Williamson, S. M., & Prybutok, V. (2024). Balancing privacy and progress: A review of privacy challenges, systemic oversight, and patient perceptions in AI-driven healthcare. Applied Sciences, 14(2), pp. 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app14020675

Yasar, R. (2025). Demystifying and framing the sharing economy literature: An in-depth content analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 520, pp. 1–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.146131

Zhang, J., & Zhang, Z. (2023). Ethics and governance of trustworthy medical artificial intelligence. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 23(1), pp. 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-023-02103-9

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17977/jabe.v10i4.63090