Blood In Ear From Infection Should I Worry

Refusal of care beneficiaries of the CMU enters the COMEG again HALDE

1 August 2008 - Press Release COMEG


Two years after his first seizure of the HALDE following the denial of care to recipients of CMU from some health professionals, highlighted by testing the COMEG (Physician Group GP for Access to Care) captures again for HALDE same reasons. HALDE had at the time (Deliberation 2006-232 of 6 November 2006) confirmed and clarified the discriminatory nature of these refusal of care. It was recommended that social security agencies, among others, to take the necessary steps to inform users and health professionals, prevention and punishment of such behavior. The media and political consequences that followed were significant: reports, position papers and various controversy, press conferences and ministerial statements of intent, etc.. The COMEG had been strangely forgotten during consultations that had taken place.

In June 2008, the National Health Insurance has just published his "Letter to doctors' No. 29 and Circular 33/2008 that allow doctors to bring complaints and claims against the beneficiaries of the CMU which certain behaviors are considered abusive . Of which:

• undue delays to appointments
• missed appointments and not canceled
• treatments not followed or interrupted
• exorbitant demands ... But no

study provides evidence that such behavior "abusive" are more common in CMU beneficiaries than for other insured persons. The COMEG denounces the discriminatory nature of these measures, even illegal for those on treatment adherence. Health Insurance seems to endorse negative perceptions of some physicians and unfounded to the most vulnerable members of our society. The COMEG seized again HALDE that the discriminatory nature of these measures by health insurance is recognized and that they be canceled. The

COMEG underlines the appalling situation that brings a health insurance secured to allow carers to make complaints against its policyholders, to try to resolve what are merely relational difficulties, due to a priori to the most vulnerable members of our society. This gives the finding of inadequate training of health professionals, and physicians in particular, to the knowledge of the realities of life for those most vulnerable and sickest of our society and their care, whereas the because of their health care mission, they should be "experts". The judge COMEG priority that training in the management of risk populations should be included in academic curricula of future physicians, and the themes training of conventional medical doctors funded by the National Health Insurance

The COMEG finally claims that this shows a lack of ethical reflection in health insurance on the problems of caring for fragile, probably due to the absence of Representatives of these populations within its advisory structures. These deficiencies lead to indiscriminate responding to requests from unfair health professionals based on a priori on the "poor". They lead the pillar of national solidarity which is the Health Insurance to take measures to combat discriminatory contre des discriminations ! Le CoMeGAS souhaite que l’Assurance Maladie tienne compte de l’expérience des populations précarisées et des professionnels de santé qui les accompagnent avant de décider de telles mesures.

Contact : Dr Philippe Foucras 0625172334

Lire :
- la lettre de saisie de la Halde par le CoMeGAS
- la « Lettre aux médecins » n° 29 de l’Assurance Maladie
- la circulaire 33/2008 de l’Assurance Maladie