Tensions within the coalition government have arisen over the issue of Individual Health Services (IGeL), sparking a new debate. These services refer to out-of-pocket payments for services provided in medical practices that are not covered by statutory health insurance. The Green Party and the Social Democratic Party (SPD) view some of these services with skepticism, urging for better protection against non-evidence-based treatments.
Andrew Ullmann, the health policy spokesperson for the Free Democratic Party (FDP) faction, has cautioned against hasty restrictions. In an interview with SPIEGEL, Ullmann emphasized the importance of respecting the professional autonomy of physicians and preserving their freedom to offer IGeL services. He argued that determining the usefulness of a health service should remain at the discretion of treating physicians. Ullmann warned that interference in medical practices, particularly by politicians, could undermine the relationship between doctors and patients, eroding trust in medical expertise.
Recently, Janosch Dahmen, the health policy spokesperson for the Green Party parliamentary group, called for an update to the aging Patient Rights Act. Similarly, Stefan Schwartze, the Federal Patient Advocate from the SPD, advocated for the prohibition of certain out-of-pocket services in medical practices. Schwartze stated, “Services deemed harmful by medical professional associations have no place in medical practices and should be banned, including within the scope of IGeL.”
The Patient Rights Act came into effect in 2013, introducing significant improvements such as guaranteed access to patient records, comprehensive information duties for physicians, and support from health insurance companies in case of suspected medical errors. However, calls for revisions to the act have persisted over the years, highlighting the need for ongoing improvements in patient rights legislation.
