TY - CHAP

T1 - Healthcare Law in Denmark

AU - Ó Cathaoir, Katharina

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - The COVID-19 pandemic (2020-) and the European migration/ refugee crisis (2015-2019) represent two of the most significant crises of this century. This chapter explores how they have affected the right to healthcare as protected under Danish and international human rights law. The chapter finds that the migration crisis has indirectly led to the introduction of fees for interpretation in healthcare. The amendment marks a shift from a universalist model of healthcare, whereby healthcare is tax financed and typically free at point of purchase, to one plagued by the politics of integration. Separately, in direct response to COVID-19, new possibilities to limit patients' rights to prioritise treating acute patients have been introduced. Following the right to health, healthcare should be available, accessible, acceptable and of good quality. While the right does not encompass an entitlement to free medical interpretation, the introduction of fees for interpretation is deliberately retrogressive contrary to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Meanwhile, the suspension of certain patient rights in response to COVID-19 appears to be framed in a proportionate manner. However, in individual cases, violations may have occurred and these limitations on the right to health are thereby in need of further study.

AB - The COVID-19 pandemic (2020-) and the European migration/ refugee crisis (2015-2019) represent two of the most significant crises of this century. This chapter explores how they have affected the right to healthcare as protected under Danish and international human rights law. The chapter finds that the migration crisis has indirectly led to the introduction of fees for interpretation in healthcare. The amendment marks a shift from a universalist model of healthcare, whereby healthcare is tax financed and typically free at point of purchase, to one plagued by the politics of integration. Separately, in direct response to COVID-19, new possibilities to limit patients' rights to prioritise treating acute patients have been introduced. Following the right to health, healthcare should be available, accessible, acceptable and of good quality. While the right does not encompass an entitlement to free medical interpretation, the introduction of fees for interpretation is deliberately retrogressive contrary to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Meanwhile, the suspension of certain patient rights in response to COVID-19 appears to be framed in a proportionate manner. However, in individual cases, violations may have occurred and these limitations on the right to health are thereby in need of further study.

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38180-5_11

DO - https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38180-5_11

M3 - Book chapter

SN - 9783031381799

BT - Are Legal Systems Converging or Diverging?

A2 - Ghio, Emilie

A2 - Perlingeiro, Ricardo

PB - Springer

ER -