PRENOVA AMBULANTE V ROGU

HUMANITARIAN MEDICINE

1. WHY IN THE COUNTRIES THAT DO NOT LEGALLY EQUATE ASYLUM SEEKERS WITH ASYLEES, DOCTORS FROM THE NATIONAL SYSTEM CANNOT EFFICIENTLY GIVE HUMANITARIAN MEDICAL HELP ...(TO ASYLUM SEEKERS) – FIVE BASIC PRINCIPLES
2. Humanitarian medicine is by definition politically independent; it cannot be practiced by the government. When a certain government, therefore, wishes to practice humanitarian medicine (with the potentials of its national health care system), it, in fact, denies humanitarian medicine and its principles
3. Humanitarian medicine is otherwise called „international medicine. “ The principles the international medicine acts upon are not equal to those of the „national medicine. “ The doctors at the medical schools who have no special academic course on „international medicine“ are not trained for work in a multicultural ambiance of humanitarian medical help. This is not only the matter of their cultural incompetence which is otherwise an important aspect but of a whole set of professional and legal problems that the doctor from the national system has no information about; neither does he/she know its problems nor is he/she trained to act: starting from the problems of a complex international epidemiological questionnaire in anamnesis-taking, through various doctrinaire disparities about curative and preventive approaches, up to the psychological support to the patient and protection of the patient's rights that derive from medicine and are part of the professional doctor's responsibilities
4. It must be clearly said that the countries which do not equate asylum seekers with asylees are en masse violating the human rights of the asylum seekers. The asylum seekers are thus coerced to solve their health problems by humanitarian medical help. If the state refuses to give competent humanitarian medical help to asylum seekers, it deepens even more the violation of the human rights which, in this case, goes well beneath the level which is, in the humanitarian law, given to the prisoner of war. Practically, it is their indirect liquidation.
5. The doctor employed in the national health care system functions on the basis of the contract he has made with each individual patient. This contract is the legal base for the doctor's work. If the state requires the doctor from the national network to do medical examination without legal basis, it not only violates its own legal order – which is in itself problematic – but it also puts the doctor in the position to have two kinds of patients; one that he is legally bound to, and the other that he has no legal obligation to. This situation is professionally known as „Dual Loyalty“ which historically originated from the South African Republic in the epoch of apartheid when the law on health care treated patients in legally different ways. Due to the problems caused by the „Dual Loyalty“ of medical work, in the year of 2002 in Cape Town an international commission was formed of some fifty international experts who concluded that the state must not develop its medical practice on the principles of „Dual Loyalty“. In many cases such practice leads to criminalization of doctor's work.
6. Medicine in the conditions of restrictive legislature is reduced to Emergency Medical Service (EMS). The experiences of Slovenia have shown that the EMS narrows down the curative, preventive and legal framework for giving medical help which is a dangerous practice not only for patients but local population as well. The EMS personnel is not trained – neither is it meant to be – for diagnostics; nor is it trained for curing many diseases that the doctor of international medicine regularly comes upon in his practice (TBC is just one well known example for this situation). In this way local population is exposed to unnecessary risks while the doctors' work is compromised in the professional and legal sense.
7. Dimitar Anakiev, Doctor of Medicine, President
   Doctors for Asylees
   Slovenia

ASYLUM CLINIC IN ROG, 03 August, 43 degrees C

Sestra Maja in pacient / nurse Maja and patient

AHMAD`S BARBER SHOP IN ROG, LJUBLJANA

Hair cutting to dr. Dimitar Anakiev by Ahmad Shami  

Dr. Anakiev: My friend, brother, patient and barber Ahmed is from suburb of Damascus named Daria. It is totally destroyed nowadays. He lost two houses, barber shop and store in bombardment. Fifteen members of his closer and wider family is living now in just one rented room in Damascus. He cannot sleep by night thinking about destiny of his family. After last decision of European court about returning refugees he is even more worried because his situation in Slovenia seems open again... Anyway he is a great friend and barber, he speaks Slovenia pretty well!

VACCINATION IN ASYLUM HOME AGAINST MEASLES BY THE NIJZ (National Public Health Institute), WAS NOT REALLY NEEDED

Recently, the NIJZ carried out vaccination against measles in the Asylum Home (this was also reported by the media), although the clinical examinations carried out by the doctor at the Asylum Home (at the reception) and then by doctors of the Infectious Clinic in Ljubljana confirmed the opinion of Greek doctors, that a Kurdish child from Syria is not in an infectious condition of the disease, but in the recovery phase in which the child is not dangerous to the environment. The baby had already had measles earlier in Greece before the family left for Slovenia. Thus, measles vaccination was not medically indicated

CEPLJENJE PROTI OŠPICAM, KI GA JE V AZILNEM DOMU OPRAVIL NIJZ (Nacionalni institut za javno zdravje), NI BILO ZARES POTREBNO

Pred nedavnim je NIJZ opravil cepljenjenje proti ošpicam v azilnem domu (o tem so poročali tudi mediji) čeprav so klinični pregledi, ki so jih opravili zdravnik v azilnem domu (ob sprejemu) in potem tudi zdravniki infekcijske klinike v Ljubljani, potrdili mnenje grških zdravnikov, da pri kurdskem otroku iz Sirije ne gre za kužno stanje bolezni temveč za fazo okrevanja v kateri otrok ni nevaren za okolico. Otrok je namreč prebolel ošpice že prej v Grčiji, preden se je družina odpravila na pot za Slovenijo. Cepljenje proti ošpicam torej ni bilo medicinski indicirano.

UČINEK RESTRIKTIVNE ZAKONODAJE NA ZDRAVJE PROSILCEV ZA AZIL - PRIMER SLOVENIJE

Člen 86. azilnega zakona katerega je sprejela vlada Mire Cerarja marca 2016 in ki v biti le potrjuje azilni zakon iz l. 2006, ki ga je sprejela vlada Janeza Janše (le da je v Janšinem zakonu zdravstveno varstvo urejal čl. 84, praktično identičen čl. 86 Cerarjeve vlade), na eni strani masovno krati človekove pravice prosilcem za azil s tem, da izključuje prosilce iz primarne zdravstvene oskrbe – dovoli edino nujno medicinsko pomoč – po drugi strani krši kodeks zdravniške etike, ker suspendira vlogo zdravnika kot zastopnika pacientovih pravic. Nenavadnost situacije, da v Sloveniji „levica“ in „desnica“ imata zelo podobno zakonodajo v zvezi z azilanti zato ni edini paradoks temveč, suspenzija kodeksa zdravniške etike, je na določeni način tudi kriminalizacija zdravnikov, ki delamo z azilanti. Seveda so negativni učinki na zdravje azilantov še veliko večji, ker izključevanje prosilcev iz primarne zdravstvene oskrbe ima tudi številne javno zdravstvene učinke. Zelo strnjeno lahko govorimo o naslednjih glavnih negativnih učinkih:

1-Dostopnost zdravnika za azilante zmanjšana

2-Zmanjšan obseg primarne zdravstvene oskrbe

3-Zmanjšen obseg sekundarne in tercialne zdravstvene oskrbe

4-Zmanjšan ali odsoten javno-zdravstveni pristop

5-Zmanjšana kakovost zdravstvene oskrbe v celosti

6-Trajni negativni učinek na zdravje azilantov

7-Suspenzija vloge zdravnika kot zastopnika pacientovih pravic

8-Kompromitiranost nekaterih osnovnih načel varne prehrane azilantov

9-Učinki na akutno in kronično stanje malnutricije azilantov

10-Vojaška namestitev azilantov privede do izoliranosti od populacije

11-Podpora preživljanju azilantov le minimalna

12-Odsodnost nekaterih velikih podpornih mehanizmov

Slovenija je članica politično vojaške zveze, ki aktivno participira v svetovni krizi, ki ustvarja begunske in migrantske valove. Begunci pri nas prihajajo zaradi zaščite, velikokrat pa naša država škoduje beguncem in migrantom namesto da bi pomagala. Celotna slovenska politika in mnogi javni razumniki so na vsa usta agitirali za vstop Slovenije v NATO. Danes se ti isti ne angažirajo, da bi se restriktivna (rasistična?) zakonodaja Slovenije (predvsem čl. 86 azilnega zakona) odpravila in begunce in migrante obravnavalo dostojno obravnavi človeka.