Activities of Gilles PARGNEAUX related to 2008/0142(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
Patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare (debate)
Amendments (7)
Amendment 106 #
Council position
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In order to enable patients to make an informed choice when they seek to receive healthcare in another Member State, the Member State of treatment should ensure that patients from other Member States receive on request the relevant information on safety and quality standards enforced on its territory as well as on which healthcare providers are subject to these standards. Furthermore, healthcare providers should provide patients on request with information on specific aspects of the healthcare services they offer. To the extent that healthcare providers already provide patients resident in the Member State of treatment with relevant information on those specific aspects, this Directive should not oblige healthcare providers to provide more extensive information to patients from other Member States. Nothing should prevent the Member State of treatment from also obliging other actors than the healthcare providers, such as insurance providers or public authorities, to provide the information on specific aspects of the healthcare services offered, if that would be more appropriate with regard to the organisation of its healthcare system. All such information should also be made available in formats accessible to persons with disabilities.
Amendment 131 #
Council position
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) The constant progress of medical science and health technologies presents both opportunities and challenges to the health systems of the Member States. Cooperation in the evaluation of new health technologies can support Member States through economies of scale and avoid duplication of effort, and provide a better basis of evidence for optimal use of new technologies to ensure safe, high- quality and efficient healthcare. Such cooperation requires sustained structures involving all the relevaHowever, the assessment of health technologies and the possible restriction of access to new technologies by certain decisions by administrative bodies raise a number of fundamental social issues which require contributions from a wide range of stakeholders and the establishment of a viable governance model. Accordingly any cooperation should involve not only the competent authorities of all the Member States, building on existing pilot projects. This Directive should therefore provide a basis for continued Union support for such cooperation. t also all the stakeholders concerned, including health professionals and representatives of patients. Moreover, this cooperation should be based on viable principles of good governance such as transparency, openness, objectivity and the impartiality of procedures.
Amendment 167 #
Council position
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
After obtaining authorisation on the basis of an objective clinical examination, which procedure should be subject to appeal in the event of authorisation being refused, patients affected by rare diseases shall have the right to access healthcare in another Member State and to receive reimbursement, even if the treatment in question is not among the benefits provided for by the legislation, administrative regulations, guidelines and codes of conduct of the medical professions of the Member State of affiliation. However, the Member State of affiliation may require the treatment to be recognised by the European reference networks or, failing that, by international medical science.
Amendment 177 #
Council position
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Healthcare that may be subject to prior authorisation shall be set out in a list by the Member State of affiliation, to be transmitted to the Commission. It shall be limited to healthcare which:
Amendment 183 #
Council position
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. The Member State of affiliation may refuse to grant prior authorisation for reasons including, but not limited to, the following reasons:
Amendment 185 #
Council position
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – point b
b) if this healthcare can be provided on its territory within a time-limit which is medically justifiable, taking into account the current state of healthacceptable on the basis of an objective medical assessment of the clinical needs of the person concerned in the light of all of the factors characterising his medical condition and the probable course of the illness ofat the person concernedtime when the request for authorisation is made;
Amendment 220 #
Council position
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The Union shall support and facilitate cooperation and the exchange of scientific information among Member States within a voluntary. For this purpose, the Commission shall, in consultation with the European Parliament, facilitate the establishment of a network connecting the national authorities or bodies responsible for health technology assessment designated by the Member States. The members of the network shall participate in, and contribute to, the network's activiat network shall be based on the principles of good governance, including transparency, objectiveness, fairness of procedures, and broad and full stakeholder participation of all relevant groups, including - but not limited to - health professionals, patients' representatives in accordance with the legislation of the Member State where, social partners and scientists, whilst respecting Member States' competence in they are establisheda of health technology assessment.