Diversity awareness, diversity competency and access to healthcare for minority groups: perspectives of healthcare professionals in Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia.

Introduction: Due to cultural, language, or legal barriers, members of social minority groups face challenges in access to healthcare. Equality of healthcare provision can be achieved through raised diversity awareness and diversity competency of healthcare professionals. The aim of this research was to explore the experiences and attitudes of healthcare professionals toward the issue of social diversity and equal access to healthcare in Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia. Methods: The data reported come from semi-structured interviews with n = 39 healthcare professionals. The interviews were analyzed using the methods of content analysis and thematic analysis. Results: Respondents in all four countries acknowledged that socioeconomic factors and membership in a minority group have an impact on access to healthcare services, but its scope varies depending on the country. Underfunding of healthcare, language barriers, inadequate cultural training or lack of interpersonal competencies, and lack of institutional support were presented as major challenges in the provision of diversity-responsive healthcare. The majority of interviewees did not perceive direct systemic exclusion of minority groups; however, they reported cases of individual discrimination through the presence of homophobia or racism. Discussion: To improve the situation, systemic interventions are needed that encompass all levels of healthcare systems - from policies to addressing existing challenges at the healthcare facility level to improving the attitudes and skills of individual healthcare providers.

Equal access to healthcare in national legislations: how do Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia counteract discrimination in healthcare?

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was a comparative analysis of legislative measures against discrimination in healthcare on the grounds of a) race and ethnicity, b) religion and belief, and c) gender identity and sexual orientation in Croatia, Germany, Poland and Slovenia. METHODS: We conducted a search for documents in national legal databases and reviewed legal commentaries, scientific literature and official reports of equality bodies. We integrated a comparative method with text analysis and the critical interpretive approach. The documents were examined in their original languages: Croatian, German, Polish, and Slovenian. RESULTS: All examined states prohibit discrimination and guarantee the right to healthcare on the constitutional level. However, there are significant differences among them on the statutory level, regarding both anti-discriminatory legal measures and other legislation affecting access to healthcare for groups of diverse race or ethnicity, religion or belief, sexual orientation or gender identity. Croatia and Slovenia show the most comprehensive legislation concerning non-discrimination in healthcare in comparison to Germany and even more Poland. Except for Slovenia, explicit provisions protecting equal access for members of the abovementioned groups are insufficiently represented in healthcare legislation. CONCLUSIONS: The study identified legislative barriers to access to healthcare for persons of diverse race or ethnicity, religion or belief, sexual orientation or gender identity in Croatia, Germany, Poland and Slovenia. The discrepancies in the level of implementation of anti-discriminatory measures among these states show that there is a need for comprehensive EU-wide regulations, which would implement the principle of equal treatment in the specific context of healthcare. General anti-discrimination regulations should be strengthened by inclusion of anti-discrimination provisions directly into national legislation relating specifically to the area of healthcare.

Diversity Competency and Access to Healthcare in Hospitals in Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia.

Diversity competency is an approach for improving access to healthcare for members of minority groups. It includes a commitment to institutional policies and practices aimed at the improvement of the relationship between patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of this research is to investigate whether and how such a commitment is included in internal documents of hospitals in Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia. Using the methods of documentary research and thematic analysis we examined internal documents received from hospitals in these countries. In all four countries, the documents concentrate on general statements prohibiting discrimination with regard to healthcare provision. Specific regulations concerning ethnicity and culture focus on the issue of language barriers. With regard to religious practices, the documents from Croatia, Poland, and Slovenia focus on dominant religious groups. Observance of other religious practices and customs is rarely addressed. Healthcare needs of patients with non-heteronormative sexual orientation, intersexual, and transgender patients are explicitly addressed in only a few internal documents. Diversity competency policies are not comprehensively implemented in hospital internal regulations in hospitals under investigation. There is a need for the development and implementation of comprehensive policies in hospitals aiming at the specific needs of minority groups.

Post-traumatic stress disorder, human rights and access to healthcare: an analysis of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights from an ethical perspective.

Background: Human rights violations such as torture are associated with a high risk of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The judgements of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) include a normative perspective on PTSD and address central ethical questions. Objective: To help bridge the gap between the psycho-medical and the legal discourse on human rights violations and to illustrate their medico-ethical implications by systematically assessing and categorizing all judgements by the ECtHR dealing with PTSD. Method: The ECtHR database was searched for 'post-traumatic stress disorder'. A descriptive statistic was performed on the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights involved and violations to these articles. In a qualitative analysis, the judgements were thematically grouped. Results: The search yielded n = 103 judgements, of which n = 90 were included. There were mostly violations of Article 3 (prohibition of torture), Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life) and Article 6 (Right to a fair trial). PTSD in these judgements is normatively discussed with regards to ethical, social and political themes such as inadequate access to healthcare, especially in prison, matters of asylum, expulsion and extradition, protection of minorities and minors, as well as rights and duties of traumatized witnesses. Conclusion: PTSD plays a central role in a large number of ECtHR judgements. Our results show that PTSD as a medical diagnosis also encompasses legal, ethical, social, and political dimensions. This knowledge is essential for healthcare professionals working with traumatized persons, but can also be relevant for political decision-makers.

Antecedentes: las violaciones de derechos humanos como la tortura están asociadas con un alto riesgo de trastorno de estrés postraumático (TEPT). Las sentencias del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH) incluyen una perspectiva normativa sobre el trastorno de estrés postraumático y abordan cuestiones éticas fundamentales.Objetivo: ayudar a cerrar la brecha entre el discurso psico-médico y legal sobre las violaciones de los derechos humanos e ilustrar sus implicaciones médico-éticas evaluando y categorizando sistemáticamente todas las sentencias del TEDH relacionados con el trastorno de estrés postraumático.Método: Se buscó en la base de datos del TEDH para 'trastorno por estrés postraumático'. Se realizó una estadística descriptiva sobre los artículos del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos involucrados y las violaciones a estos artículos. En un análisis cualitativo, las sentencias se agruparon temáticamente.Resultados: La búsqueda arrojó n = 103 sentencias, de las cuales se incluyeron n = 90. En su mayoría fueron violaciones del artículo 3 (prohibición de la tortura), artículo 8 (derecho al respeto de la vida privada y familiar) y artículo 6 (derecho a un juicio justo). El TEPT en estas sentencias se discute normativamente con respecto a temas éticos, sociales y políticos como el acceso inadecuado a la atención médica, especialmente en prisión, asuntos de asilo, expulsión y extradición, protección de minorías y menores, así como derechos y deberes de testigos traumatizados.Conclusión: TEPT juega un papel central en un gran número de sentencias del TEDH. Nuestros resultados muestran que el TEPT como diagnóstico médico también abarca dimensiones legales, éticas, sociales y políticas. Este conocimiento es esencial para que los profesionales sanitarios trabajen con personas traumatizadas, pero también puede ser relevante para los responsables de la toma de decisiones políticas.

Social diversity and access to healthcare in Europe: how does European Union's legislation prevent from discrimination in healthcare?

BACKGROUND: Social diversity can affect healthcare outcomes in situations when access to healthcare is limited for specific groups. Although the principle of equality is one of the central topics on the agenda of the European Union (EU), its scope in the field of healthcare, however, is relatively unexplored. The aim of this study is to identify and systematically analyze primary and secondary legislation of the EU Institutions that concern the issue of access to healthcare for various minority groups. In our research, we have concentrated on three features of diversity: a) gender identity and sexual orientation, b) race and ethnicity, and c) religion or belief. METHOD AND MATERIALS: For the purpose of this analysis, we conducted a search of database Eur-Lex, the official website of European Union law and other public documents of the European Union, based on specific keywords accompanied by review of secondary literature. Relevant documents were examined with regard to the research topic. Our search covered documents that were in force between 13 December 2007 and 31 July 2019. RESULTS: Generally, the EU legal system prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, racial or ethnic origin, sex, and sexual orientation. However, with regard to the issue of non-discrimination in access to healthcare EU secondary law provides protection against discrimination only on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin and sex. The issue of discrimination in healthcare on the grounds of religion or belief, gender identity and sexual orientation is not specifically addressed under EU secondary law. DISCUSSION: The absence of regulations regarding non-discrimination in the EU secondary law in the area of healthcare may result from the division of competences between the European Union and the Member States. Reluctance of the Member States to adopt comprehensive antidiscrimination regulations leads to a situation, in which protection in access to healthcare primarily depends on national regulations. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that EU antidiscriminatory law with regard to access to healthcare is fragmentary. Prohibition of discrimination of the level of European binding law does not fully encompass all aspects of social diversity.