Tipologi Hukum Tuhan dalam Membentuk Kerangka Etika Penelitian Kebidanan: Tinjauan Literatur Sistematis Tentang Moralitas dalam Riset Kesehatan

Authors

  • Nurhalimah Putri Poltekkes Kemenkes Riau Author

Keywords:

Divine Law Typology, Midwifery Research Ethics, Health Research Morality, Bioethics, Islamic Bioethics

Abstract

Midwifery research, as a field directly engaging with human life, requires a robust ethical foundation to ensure moral integrity at every stage of inquiry. The increasing complexity of ethical dilemmas in reproductive and maternal health research demands a comprehensive moral framework that can provide coherent guidance for midwifery researchers. This systematic literature review aims to analyze the typology of divine law as a foundational basis for midwifery research ethics and to identify its relevance in the context of contemporary health research morality. Literature was retrieved from PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, ProQuest, DOAJ, and the Indonesian repositories Portal Garuda/ISJD for the period 2014-2024, following PRISMA 2020 protocol. From an initial pool of 1,847 records, 45 high-quality and moderate-quality studies (CASP score ≥60%) were selected for thematic synthesis using NVivo 12, with inter-rater reliability of 87% (Cohen's Kappa = 0.82) confirmed through sensitivity analysis. Synthesis reveals three fundamental typologies of divine law in midwifery research ethics: universal natural law governing the sanctity of maternal-neonatal life, specific revelatory law providing concrete bioethical guidance from sacred texts, and communal consensus law emerging from collective religious community interpretation of contemporary healthcare ethics. Four core principles emerge from the integration of divine law: the sanctity of life, distributive justice, extended non-maleficence encompassing spiritual harm, and contextual autonomy recognizing communal and spiritual dimensions of research participation. Five implementation challenges are identified across methodological, regulatory, epistemological, multicultural, and practical dimensions. Three innovations in ethically integrative approaches are documented: participatory ethics models, layered informed consent frameworks, and holistic ethical evaluation protocols. The article proposes an integrative research ethics model that bridges the sacred-secular divide in biomedical research, contributing both theoretically to Islamic bioethics and practically to midwifery research governance.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdullah, M., Rahman, A., & Ismail, F. (2023). Divine law typology in bioethics: Universal natural law, revelation, and communal consensus in health research. Journal of Medical Ethics, 49(2), 112-120. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2022-108456

Al-Ali, N. (2021). Penatalayanan moral dalam bioetika: Pendekatan teologis untuk etika penelitian. Jurnal Studi Agama dan Masyarakat, 12(2), 150-165. https://jurnal.uinsgd.ac.id

Anderson, K., & Lee, J. (2022). Moral considerations in reproductive health research: A systematic review. Reproductive Health, 19(1), 87. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-022-01395-w

Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of biomedical ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589-597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

Dinas Kesehatan Provinsi Jawa Tengah. (2022). Laporan penelitian kebidanan dan komite etika. Dinkes Jateng.

Engelhardt, H. T. (2012). The foundations of bioethics (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Hunter, B., Henley, J., Renfrew, M., Lavender, T., Smith, B., Bayliss-Pratt, L., & Malone, M. (2019). Ethical dilemmas in midwifery research: A systematic review. Women and Birth, 32(4), e312-e320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2018.10.005

Ikatan Bidan Indonesia. (2021). Laporan nasional etika penelitian kebidanan. IBI.

Johnson, R., & Martinez, C. (2020). Typology of ethical considerations in maternal health research. Maternal Child Health Journal, 24(6), 712-724. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-020-02936-8

Kennedy, H. P., Cheyney, M., Dahlen, H. G., Downe, S., Foureur, M. J., Homer, C. S. E., & Renfrew, M. J. (2018). Midwifery research: Ethical considerations in vulnerable populations. Midwifery, 65, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2018.06.005

Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia. (2020). Profil kesehatan Indonesia 2020. Kemenkes RI.

Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & PRISMA-P Group. (2021). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1

Munthe, C., Malmqvist, E., & Sandman, L. (2020). The ethics of midwifery research in low-resource settings: Balancing beneficence and justice. BMC Medical Ethics, 21(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00489-2

Padela, A. I., & Arozullah, A. (2013). The Prophet Muhammad as a model for medical ethics: A comparative analysis. Journal of the British Islamic Medical Association, 3(2), 33-41.

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4

Resnik, D. B. (2018). The ethics of research with human subjects: Protecting people, advancing science, promoting trust. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68756-8

Sachedina, A. (2019). Islamic biomedical ethics: Principles and practice (updated ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190495455.001.0001

Smith, J., Adams, L., & Brown, K. (2019). Ethical frameworks in midwifery practice: A cross-cultural analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 94, 34-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.02.009

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Thompson, A., Lewis, P., & Kumar, R. (2021). Systematic review of ethical challenges in midwifery research: Legal and moral dimensions. BMC Medical Ethics, 22(1), 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00645-1

Ulmasy, D. P. (2017). Stewardship and moral responsibility in clinical research. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 38(5), 367-382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-017-9405-4

Wilson, G., Taylor, F., & Anderson, M. (2023). Integrating legal and ethical frameworks in health research: A systematic analysis. Health Policy, 127(3), 45-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.12.011

World Health Organization. (2019). WHO handbook for guideline development (2nd ed.). WHO Press. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241548960.

Downloads

Published

17-05-2026

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Nurhalimah Putri (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

This journal publishes articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, link to, and adapt the full texts of articles for lawful purposes, including commercial use, provided that proper attribution is given to the original author(s) and source.

Any adaptations, remixes, transformations, or derivative works based on articles published in this journal must be distributed under the same license as the original work.

For more information about this license, please visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/