4 Amendments of Bill NEWTON DUNN related to 2008/0142(COD)
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) patients have a means of making complaints and are guaranteed remedies and compensation when they suffer harm arising from the healthcare they receive. Irrespective of the system chosen the arrangements for correction and compensation must be fit for purpose and accessible to all, i.e. open, quick, cheap, independent and capable of use by an ill or injured patient whose first language may not be that of the Member State. The procedures must not restrict the complaint and not require the patient to return to the Member State in which the treatment took place.
Amendment 456 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Diagnostic tests, scans, and x-rays usually done in conjunction with a hospital out-patient consultation are regarded as non-hospital treatment if obtaining prior authorisation would mean the patient having to make a further cross-border visit.
Amendment 491 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The prior authorisation system shall be limited to what is necessary and proportionate to avoid such impact, and shall not constitute a means of arbitrary discrimination. This Directive presumes in favour of the patient's right to choose cross-border healthcare. The requirement for prior authorisation is the exception, not the rule. Patients considering cross- border healthcare should inform their national healthcare body in case restrictions are in operation. Individual cases or small numbers of patients seeking cross-border healthcare are highly unlikely to threaten the proper functioning of the national healthcare scheme or its finance. Member States must make their criteria for requiring prior authorisation public and clearly distinguish between medical, administrative and financial factors.
Amendment 543 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Irrespective of the system chosen, the appeals process must be fit for purpose and accessible to all, i.e. open, quick, cheap, independent and capable of use by an ill or injured patient whose first language may not be that of the Member State. Criteria for deciding appeal decisions must be made public.