2020 EManuscript Technologies. All rights reserved. A contractual relationship between doctors and patients demonstrates that there could be a nature of consumerism due to increases in demand for healthcare services, changing patterns of diseases, and medical technology development. These circumstances may have implications of medical expenses. This fact may lead to asymmetric information, resulting in delegation of decision-making authority because of patients' lack of knowledge regarding the medication and patients' trust in physicians. Moreover, this trust may result in supplier induce demand and imperative technology in providing healthcare services. Therapeutic transactions underlying paternalism have led to injustice as a result of imbalance in doctors' and patients' rights and obligations. This study investigated the law enforcement that still applies legal positivism and that has not been able to provide sufficient protection for patients in a form of legal sanctions. This research used the doctrinal legal approach and secondary data as the main sources. The data were then analyzed using progressive legal reasoning. This study revealed that asymmetric information was deemed disrespectful for patients' autonomy regarding the Informed Consent. To protect patients against the absence of transparency and accountability in medical interventions, patients' autonomy should be upheld. Therefore, both medical service providers and patients could act as equal partners. This attempt might be challenging as therapeutic contracts may clash with the notion of patients' autonomy. Using a beneficence in trust approach could be a solution that allows patients' autonomy to become the integral part of the medical practice. Ultimately, it also aimed at eliminating maleficence in medical treatment.