Access to Care: Why Macron is paying third parties from Mothball

ADVERTISEMENT

Say “general third party payments” to your city doctor and check the results. Coupled with the desire to fight it, intense irritation will continue.

The world of health and social protection has been wondering since the article on this subject was published at Les Echos on Thursday. Are we witnessing a return to the benefits of third party payments? According to the Economic Daily, the retiring president “plans to systematize third-party payments in good health and even make full third-party payments,” that is, full repayment of invoices, that is, Health insurance than covered by 450 complementary health insurance (mutual insurance, insurance and funded institutions).

With exceptions (unstable public, pregnant women, patients with long-term illness), French people who proceed with the additional part no longer need to touch their wallets, except in the case of excessive medical expenses.

This looks like an opportunity for Emmanuel Macron to remind the 7.7 million Frenchmen who voted for Jean-Luc Melenchon in the first round to remind him of his social fiber. For years, the third man in the presidential election has advocated 100% reimbursement of all care with Medicare.

Marker pen. He is not the only one. The commitment of the 2012 Francois Hollande campaign, the generalization of compulsory third-party payments, was the main battle of his unstoppable health minister. Marisol Touraine enthusiastically defended this flagship bill of her health law and finally voted in December 2015. The right was fiercely opposed, but the text hit the left, gathering communists, socialists (including Slinger), and environmentalists.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Generalized third-party payments are a very powerful and very meaningful left-wing marker for voters and analyze excellent file experts. Macron grabs it during the half century. Had too many Dutch implications, but now it’s his very clever to pull it out. »»

By bringing third-party payments back to the fore, Emmanuel Macron can tackle health issues using the same angle of attack as his opponents in the second round. That is purchasing power and abandonment of care for financial reasons. According to the France Assos Santé Patients Association, two-thirds of French people have already decided not to seek treatment, including 45%, because the fees are too high or the cost cannot be advanced.

Ramdam.. This political sound is reminiscent of a small ramdam around Grandesek. This reform, aroused at the end of last year, is its most radical version, showing the programmed death of complement absorbed by Almighty Secu. Some observers thought it was a way for governments to put pressure on each other. Interrelationships are regularly chosen due to excessive administrative costs and are evidence that executives are not confident in them.

Similarly, Macron-style third-party payments are subject to complementary health insurance oversight by social security and are delegated the role of “financial intermediary”. echo.. Specifically, patients do not have to pay to move forward, and doctors are paid by a single interlocutor, health insurance. Health insurance is responsible for raising funds from complementary ones.

With this version of third-party payments, turning health insurance into a central bank could overcome one of the gray areas of the original system that pushed 20,000 city doctors to the streets in the spring of 2015. increase. Are you afraid then? They spend a lot of time chasing 450 organizations when unpaid and suffer from the constraints of a healthcare system that is too “state-controlled” to their tastes. A year after arriving at the Ministry of Health in 2018, Agnes Busan was forced to serve as a firefighter and drive the entire company into a bud due to this political tension.

Will the bill pass in four years? So far, nothing has been arbitrated. There is no obligatory personality that may not fail to rekindle the dissatisfaction of the lab coat who is wary of a series of events, who pays what. And if each other historically favors full third-party payments, the idea of ​​being responsible for social security does not appeal to them. The discussion between the two rounds this Wednesday could be an opportunity for the two presidential candidates to clarify their position.