Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot on Tuesday, 4 April, tweeted that the state government and the protesting doctors have finally reached a consensus on the recently passed Right To Health Bill.
“I am happy that finally an agreement has been reached between the government and the doctors on Right to Health and Rajasthan has become the first state in the country to implement Right to Health.”Rajasthan CM Ashok Gehlot
He added, “I hope that the doctor-patient relationship will remain the same in future as well.”
Dr Sunil Chugh, President of Rajasthan IMA, told FIT that after Tuesday's rally, protesting doctors will hold a meeting and officially withdraw the protest.
What Has Changed Now?
According to the memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between the state government, the Indian Medical Association (IMA), the Private Hospitals and Nursing Homes Society (PHNHS), and the United Private Clinics and Hospitals of Rajasthan (UPCHAR), the Right to Health bill has now:
Excluded less than 50-bedded private hospitals
Private hospitals built without the government’s help or subsidies
However, the legislation will still cover:
Private medical college hospitals
Hospitals run by trusts
Private hospitals built with the government’s help, on government land, or with subsidies
Hospitals established on PPP mode
The MoU signed between the state government, the IMA, the PHNHS, and the UPCHAR.
(Photo: Accessed by FIT)
The MoU also stated that cases filed against the striking doctors will be withdrawn, a single window system will be established for approvals, and that any amendments to the bill will be “done after consultation with two representatives of IMA.”
Why Doctors Were Against The Bill: The Right To Health Bill promises residents of Rajasthan the right to free healthcare in any emergency situation, in any medical establishment across the state, and any information related to the patient or any illnesses.
However, the Indian Medical Association and doctors practicing in the state took to the streets to protest against the bill, demanding its withdrawal. ‘complete rollback’ was their call to action.
The bill could result in increased bureaucratic control and interference in the functioning of private hospitals
The bill did not clarify what it meant by ‘emergency care’
No mention of how and when the private practices could get reimbursed for treating patients free of cost
No clarity on what the government would reimburse for – Will the government imburse private clinics for the cost of transportation, equipment, diagnostic tests, etc?
Doctors feared being wrongfully prosecuted for not treating emergency cases – What if a small clinic is not equipped to handle an emergency case? Would the doctor be held responsible for that too?
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)