The Minister of the Interior talks about reforming emergency medical aid. Former Ministers of Health and many doctors denounce this nonsense which will not lead to savings.
Barely a few days after his arrival in government, Bruno Retailleau announces the color: he wants to reform the AME. State medical aid allows people in an irregular situation in France to have access to care under certain conditions. Aid which is not appreciated by part of the right and the far right, who consider that this makes France attractive, thus attracting more immigration. The Minister of the Interior also declared on TF1September 23: “We have a concern, it is that we are one of the European countries which gives the most advantages and I do not want France to stand out, for France to be the most attractive country of Europe for a certain number of social benefits for access to care.”
A statement that shocked the health world, which considers a possible reform of the AME as dangerous for public health and counterproductive on the subject of illegal immigration. Eight former health ministers gathered behind a platform in the world to “recall the importance of maintaining state medical aid”. Concerning the attractiveness of France for people wishing to migrate to Europe, they are unanimous: “It is a fantasy contrary to the facts, again clearly established in two solid reports drawn up in 2019 and 2023”, adding that “the “AME does not concern comfort care, likely to attract immigration whose causes are obviously more diverse and complex.”
The world of healthcare is also up in arms after this declaration by the Minister of the Interior. Philippe Frogueldoctor and teacher-researcher, speaks of a “moral shipwreck” and a “health time bomb”. For his part, Anthony Gonçalves believes that such a measure would aim to flatter the RN electorate: “The French have mobilized to reject the RN in power and find themselves this morning with a “Bruno Mégret” with small feet who wants to attack the AME in contempt of public health and all medical ethics.”
The French have mobilized to refuse the RN in power and find themselves this morning with a small-footed Bruno Megret who wants to attack the AME in defiance of public health and all medical ethics. The collaboration is underway https://t.co/UbTNXnjx9M
— Anthony Gonçalves (@ProfAnthoG) September 24, 2024
Removing the AME would be more expensive than maintaining it
Behind Bruno Retailleau’s proposal, there is also a notion of economy. By reducing the scope of action of the AME, transforming it into emergency medical aid, the aim is to reduce the Social Security budget. However, according to Aurélien Rousseau, Roselyne Bachelot, François Braun, Agnès Buzyn, Agnès Firmin Le Bodo, Marisol Touraine, Frédéric Valletoux and Olivier Véran, the signatories of the platform, this will not work: “Weakening the SOUL is exposing our health system faces increased pressure from later and therefore more serious and costly treatment.” The AME represents an expenditure of 1.2 billion euros per year, or approximately 0.5% of the health expenditure planned by the Social Security budget. Last year, there were 466,000 AME beneficiaries.
A danger to public health
The eight former ministers finally warn of the risks that a removal, or a reduction, of the AME would represent for public health. They explain that financially preventing a person from consulting a general practitioner for a pathology would only delay their care, pushing them to go to the emergency room with a more serious health concern: “Taking care of a beneficiary costs seven times more expensive in hospital than in community medicine.” They are also worried about the risk of an epidemic that this could represent, while the world is still traumatized by the Covid-19 pandemic. “Concretely, weakening the AME means disinvesting in the field of prevention, whether in particular vaccination or screening. In fact, such a decline creates a risk for the public health of all our fellow citizens, particularly infectious”, comment the ministers, who also warn about medical ethics. As recalled by National Council of the Order of Physicians, the Hippocratic oath, taken by all doctors before practicing, says: “I will respect all people, their autonomy and their will, without any discrimination according to their condition or their convictions”, “I will give my care to the poor and to anyone who asks me for them. Furthermore, the Geneva Declaration, annexed to the Code of Medical Ethics and adopted by the General Assembly of the World Medical Association in 1948, says: “I WILL NOT ALLOW considerations of age, illness or disability, creed, ethnic origin, gender, nationality, political affiliation, race, sexual orientation, social status or any other factor comes between my duty and my patient.”