Page 52 - S. Ličen, I. Karnjuš, & M. Prosen (Eds.). (2019). Women, migrations and health: Ensuring transcultural healthcare. Koper, University of Primorska Press.
P. 52
ž Lenarčič and Mateja Sedmak
conducted interviews with employees in Asylum Home and applicants for
international protection. Based on the data obtained, both studies came to
the identical conclusion that health treatment for applicants for international
protection in Slovenia is, in the majority of cases, inappropriate and limited.
One of the main obstacles is the legally defined right to emergency health
treatment, because it is not clear what exactly this means, and as such it can
be subject of different interpretations.
Another important work regarding migrants’ access to health services was
published by Lipovec Čebron (2010). The author begins from the concept of
medical citizenship and argues that it is an important category in examining
the healthcare aspects of migration to Slovenia. Namely, the welfare services
that had been available to all citizens prior to Slovenian independence in
1991 were converted into a source of inequality and exclusion after that date.
‘Health policy has consistently become less socially oriented, as is reflected
in increasingly restrictive and selective access to health services – or in other
words, restrictive and selective medical citizenship in Slovenia’ (Lipovec Če-
bron, 2010, p. 193). However, the main goal of this research is to prove that the
seemingly regulated access to medical services still often deprives migrants
of their medical entitlements. The author starts from the assumption that due
to their frequent failure to assert healthcare rights, it is very important for mi-
grants how health workers perceive them. To that end empirical data were
obtained by interviews with health workers and administrative staff in Ljubl-
jana and in the Slovenian part of Istria who had the most frequent contacts
with the immigrant population.¹⁰ Based on the comments of medical pro-
fessionals, the author concludes that their views of people without health
insurance mirror neoliberal health policies. Namely, ‘they perceive them as
“foreigners” who should be taken care of in other countries, as a disorderly,
“impure,” “incompetent” people who represent a “burden” for the Slovenian
health system’ (Lipovec Čebron, 2010, p. 207).
In recent decades, researchers have identified the great impact of socio-
economic factors on various health outcomes. The results of a recent com-
prehensive health study were published in the report Inequalities in Health
in Slovenia (Buzeti et al., 2011). Although the study does not mention immi-
grants specifically, it offers detailed insight into the sphere of inequalities in
¹⁰ The survey included 42 persons: unstructured and semi-structured interviews were conducted
with 13 specialist medical doctors, four general practitioners and six nurses. Responses to the
questionnaire were received from five specialist medical doctors, three general practitioners
and 11 administrative workers from healthcare institutions.
50
conducted interviews with employees in Asylum Home and applicants for
international protection. Based on the data obtained, both studies came to
the identical conclusion that health treatment for applicants for international
protection in Slovenia is, in the majority of cases, inappropriate and limited.
One of the main obstacles is the legally defined right to emergency health
treatment, because it is not clear what exactly this means, and as such it can
be subject of different interpretations.
Another important work regarding migrants’ access to health services was
published by Lipovec Čebron (2010). The author begins from the concept of
medical citizenship and argues that it is an important category in examining
the healthcare aspects of migration to Slovenia. Namely, the welfare services
that had been available to all citizens prior to Slovenian independence in
1991 were converted into a source of inequality and exclusion after that date.
‘Health policy has consistently become less socially oriented, as is reflected
in increasingly restrictive and selective access to health services – or in other
words, restrictive and selective medical citizenship in Slovenia’ (Lipovec Če-
bron, 2010, p. 193). However, the main goal of this research is to prove that the
seemingly regulated access to medical services still often deprives migrants
of their medical entitlements. The author starts from the assumption that due
to their frequent failure to assert healthcare rights, it is very important for mi-
grants how health workers perceive them. To that end empirical data were
obtained by interviews with health workers and administrative staff in Ljubl-
jana and in the Slovenian part of Istria who had the most frequent contacts
with the immigrant population.¹⁰ Based on the comments of medical pro-
fessionals, the author concludes that their views of people without health
insurance mirror neoliberal health policies. Namely, ‘they perceive them as
“foreigners” who should be taken care of in other countries, as a disorderly,
“impure,” “incompetent” people who represent a “burden” for the Slovenian
health system’ (Lipovec Čebron, 2010, p. 207).
In recent decades, researchers have identified the great impact of socio-
economic factors on various health outcomes. The results of a recent com-
prehensive health study were published in the report Inequalities in Health
in Slovenia (Buzeti et al., 2011). Although the study does not mention immi-
grants specifically, it offers detailed insight into the sphere of inequalities in
¹⁰ The survey included 42 persons: unstructured and semi-structured interviews were conducted
with 13 specialist medical doctors, four general practitioners and six nurses. Responses to the
questionnaire were received from five specialist medical doctors, three general practitioners
and 11 administrative workers from healthcare institutions.
50
