Advertisement

Patients’ Rights: A Lost Cause or Missed Opportunity?

  • Erika Szyszczak
Chapter
Part of the Legal Issues of Services of General Interest book series (LEGAL)

Abstract

To analyse these issues, Sect. 5.2 of this chapter examines the political, legal and economic context of the Commission’s proposal for a Directive on Patients’ Rights. Section 5.3 examines the content of the proposal against the background examined in Sect. 5.2. Section 5.4 traces the historical background, and Sect. 5.5 the troubled legislative history of the proposed Directive. Section 5.6 examines in greater detail three points of contention which have emerged as sticking points to achieving and an agreement in the Council: whether the EU has competence to legislate so broadly in the field of health care and what is the correct legal base to use; whether long-term health care (LTHC) should be included in the Directive, and in what circumstances can a Member State refuse to give prior authorisation for hospital medical care in another Member State and the range of institutions providing medical care which can be included in the Directive. Section 5.7 discusses the role of accountability and the role of law in the determination of rights which would flow from the adoption of the Directive. It also examines the role of accountability in the use of cooperative networks, which have been deployed for many years in this area but are now explicitly recognised in the draft proposal and will play an important role given the limited EU legislative competence in the field of health care and the need to treat certain emerging issues in a sensitive manner. Section 5.8 examines the different levels of impact the proposed Directive would have if it is ever adopted, and discusses whether the non-adoption of the Directive would be a lost opportunity.

Keywords

European Union Member State Legal Base Prior Authorisation Patient Mobility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

My thanks to comments on a draft of this chapter from the University of Leicester CELI Internal Market research cluster and participants at the conference ‘Health Care and EU Law’ at Nijmegen University in October 2009.

References

  1. Baeten R (2008) The proposal for a directive on patients’ rights in cross-border health care. In: Degryse C (ed) Social developments in the European Union. OSE/ETUC, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernard N (2005) Between a rock and a hard place: internal market v open coordination in EU social welfare law. In: Dougan M, Spaventa E (eds) Social welfare and EU law. Hart, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Cram L (1994) The European commission as multi-organisation: social policy and IT policy in the EU. J Europ Pub Pol 1Google Scholar
  4. Davies G (2007) The effect of Mrs Watts trip to France on the national health service. Kings Law J 18Google Scholar
  5. Everson M (1995) The legacy of the market citizen. In: Shaw J, More G (eds) New legal dynamics of European Union. OUP, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Fisher E (2004) The European Union in the age of accountability. Oxf J Leg Stud 24Google Scholar
  7. Flear M (2009) The open method of coordination on health care after the lisbon strategy II: towards a neo-liberal framing? EIOP, Special Issue I, vol 13, available at: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/index.php/eiop/article/view
  8. Greer S (2006) Uninvited Europeanization: neofunctionalism, health services and the EU. J Europ Pub Pol 13Google Scholar
  9. Greer S (2009) The politics of European health policies. Open University Press, MaidenheadGoogle Scholar
  10. Hancher L, Sauter W (2009) One foot in the grave or one step beyond? From Sodemare to DocMorris: The EU’s freedom of establishment case law concerning health care, TILEC discussion paper series, 2009/28, available at: http://dbiref.uvt.nl/iPort?request=full_record&db=wo&language=eng&query=doc_id=3497608
  11. Hancher L, Sauter W (2010) One step beyond? from sodemare to docmorris: the EU’s freedom of establishment case law concerning health care. CMLRev 47Google Scholar
  12. Hatzopoulos V (2002) Killing national health and insurance systems but healing patients? the European market for health care services after the judgments of the ECJ in Vanbraekel and Peerbooms. CMLRev 39Google Scholar
  13. Hervey T (2003) The right to health in EU law. In: Hervey T, Kenner J (eds) Economic and social rights under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Hart, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Hervey T, Vanhercke B (2010) Health care and the EU: the law and policy patchwork. In: Mossialos E, Permanand G, Baeten R, Hervey T (eds) Health systems governance in Europe: the role of European Union law and policy. CUP, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Jacobs R, Goddard M (2007) How do performance indicators add up? an examination of composite indicators in public services. PMM 27Google Scholar
  16. Joerges C (2008) Integration through de-legalisation? EL Rev 33(3)Google Scholar
  17. Kickert K (1993) Complexity, governance and dynamics: conceptual explorations of network management. In: Kooiman J (ed) Modern governance: new government-society interactions. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Kostera T (2007) Unwelcome Europeanisation—the development of cross-border patient mobility, master of European studies thesis, 2007, College of Europe, Bruges, available at: http://62.102.106.100/Objects/2/Files/Kostera.pdf
  19. Krisch N, Kingsbury B (2006) Introduction: global governance and global administrative law in the international legal order. EJIL 17Google Scholar
  20. Legido-Quigley H et al (2007) Patient mobility in the European Union. BMJ 334Google Scholar
  21. Marks G (1993) Structural policy and multilevel governance in the European community. In: Cafruny A, Rosenthal G (eds) The state of the European community. Lyne Rienner, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Mossialos E, McKee M (2002) EU law and the social character of health care. PIE-Peter-Lang, Brussels (Work & Society No. 38)Google Scholar
  23. Newdick C (2006) Citizenship, free movement and health care: cementing individual rights by corroding social solidarity. CML Rev 43Google Scholar
  24. Neergaard U (2011, forthcoming) The Commission’s soft law in the area of services of general economic interest. In: Szyszczak E, Davies J, Bekkedal T, Andenas M (eds) Developments in services of general economic interest. TMC Asser Press, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  25. Piccioto S (1996/1997) Networks in international economic integration: fragmented states and the dilema of neo-liberalism. Northwestern J Internatl Law Bus 17Google Scholar
  26. Propper C (2008) Competition and quality: evidence from the NHS internal markets 1991-9. Th Econ J 118Google Scholar
  27. Radaelli C (2009) Europeanisation: solution or problem? EIoP 8. Available at: http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2004-016.htm
  28. Robertson R, Dixon A (2010) Choice at the point of referral, London, Kings Fund. Available at: http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/choice_at_the_point.html
  29. Rowland D et al (2004) Price and Pollack A, Implications of the draft European Union services directive for health care. Lancet 364Google Scholar
  30. Sauter W (2008) The proposed patient mobility directive and the reform of cross-border health care in the EU, TILEC discussion paper 2008-034, Tilburg University, The Netherlands. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1277110
  31. Sauter W (2009) The proposed patient mobility directive and the reform of cross-border health care in the EU Leg Issues Eur Integration 36Google Scholar
  32. Scharpf F (2002) The European social model: coping with the challenges of diversity. JCMS 40Google Scholar
  33. Sikora K (2010) Terrifyingly inept foreign doctors are a symptom of a sickness in the NHS—not the cause, Daily Mail, 18 March 2010. Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1258782/KAROL-SIKORA-Terrifyingly-inept-foreign-doctors-symptom-sickness-NHS-cause.html
  34. Slaughter AM (2004) A new world order. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  35. Szyszczak E (2006) Experimental governance: the open Method of coordination. ELJ 12. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=913101
  36. Szyszczak E (2009a) Legal tools in the liberalisation of welfare markets. In: Neergaard U, Nielsen R, Roseberry L (eds) Integrating welfare functions into EU law—from Rome to Lisbon. DJØF Publishing, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  37. Szyszczak E (2009b) Modernising health care: pilgrimage for the holy grail? In: Krajewski M, Neergaard U, van de Gronden J (eds) The changing legal framework for services of general interest in Europe between competition and solidarity. TMC Asser Press, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  38. Thatcher M, Coen D (2008) Network governance and multi-level delegation: European networks of regulatory agencies. J Eur Pub Pol 28Google Scholar
  39. Wincott D (2001) Looking forward or harking back? the Commission and the reform of governance in the European Union. JCMS 39Google Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C.ASSER PRESS and the author 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of LawUniversity of LeicesterLeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations