Conflicting views have emerged in Rajasthan before the passage of the Right to Health Bill in the ongoing budget session of the State Assembly, with the private hospitals opposing the provision for mandatory free-of-cost emergency treatment in the proposed legislation. The Bill was tabled in the House on September 22 last year.
The delay in the enactment of the Right to Health Act, for which the ruling Congress had made a promise in its manifesto for the 2018 State Assembly election, has caused a serious concern among the health activists here. The Bill was referred to a Select Committee following a protest staged by private doctors outside the Assembly.
The committee, which met in the Assembly for the first time this week, deliberated on the changes proposed to be incorporated in the Bill based on the suggestions made by doctors, private hospitals and other stakeholders. BJP MLA Kalicharan Saraf, one of the members of the committee, demanded that the amendments accepted on the basis of suggestions be given in writing.
The statutory right to health is expected to streamline medical services and guarantee the availability of essential facilities to citizens. The Jan Swasthya Abhiyan (JSA), a network of civil society groups and health rights activists, had prepared a draft Act on the subject and submitted it to the Health Department’s authorities shortly after the new government was formed in December 2018.
The draft Bill was put up on public domain in March 2022 before its introduction in the Assembly. Private hospitals and nursing homes across the State observed a day’s token strike on Monday, marking the opening day of the Assembly’s budget session, to protest against the Bill, which they said would create hardships for them.
Indian Medical Association-Rajasthan branch president Sunil Chugh said the rule making it mandatory for private hospitals to provide free treatment without any provision to compensate them would financially drain them. Dr. Chugh said the arrangements for referral transport should be made by the State government and only medical experts should be authorised to look into the disputes between patients and hospital staff.
Vivek Sharma, consultant paediatrician at Eternal Hospital, Sanganer, said the protection of patients’ entitlements should not be done at the cost of the rights of medical practitioners. “There are no clear definitions and demarcations in the Bill... It is only a charter of patients’ rights rather than ensuring basic health determinants. No doctor will turn down a patient, but there is a line between providing services and doing charity,” he said.
JSA coordinator Chhaya Pachauli said the private health care sector must support the Bill for larger welfare of the poor and marginalised people. “The Bill includes preventive, curative and health promotion services, while the private sector only caters to the curative part and that too only in the areas where they find it economically viable,” she said.
Ms. Pachauli, director of the voluntary group Prayas, said the Bill had referred to private health sector only in the context of emergency medical care if no public institution was available in the immediate vicinity till the patient could be transferred there. The kind of emergencies could be specified in the rules to be framed later, but using this as a reason to discredit the entire Bill would be wrong, she added.
The State had the required numbers of doctors, paramedical staff, equipment and buildings at appropriate distances to strengthen the public health care system, said Ms. Pachauli. The State goverment should commit itself through the legislation to streamlining and revamping the systems and infrastructure which already existed, she said. (EOM)
