- The German Constitutional Court has obliged the Bundestag to pass legislation on the protection of persons with disabilities in the event of racial discrimination in the event of a pandemic.
- The Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe ruled that the legislator had violated the German constitution by not doing so so far
- The constitutional complaint is from people with disabilities and chronic diseases, who fear that if the situation in the intensive care unit worsens, when these departments cannot see all patients, they will be deleted.
- You can find more of this information on the Onet homepage
The German Constitutional Court has obliged the Bundestag to pass legislation on the protection of persons with disabilities in the event of a triad in the event of a pandemic. The legislator violated the German constitution by not doing so yet – the ruling of the Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe.
The ruling is based on Article 3 of the German Constitution, according to which the legislator has the right to protect persons with disabilities. In Trinity – a procedure used in emergency medicine – it is necessary to identify patients who need intensive care who will be treated first if help is not available to everyone.
The rest of the article is below the video.
They are afraid of being deleted
The constitutional complaint was filed by nine people with disabilities and chronic diseases, who fear that if the situation in the intensive care unit worsens, when these units cannot see all patients and there will be no guidance from the legislator, they will be ignored.
Germany’s highest court has now ruled in their favour. No one should be discriminated against on the basis of disability in allocating needed intensive care resources if they are not available to everyone.
The German Interdisciplinary Society for Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (Divi) and other specialized associations have developed “Ethical Recommendations in Clinical Medicine”. People who complained to CT are concerned about the criteria listed there, because the patient’s fitness and comorbidities also play a role. So they fear that because their chances of survival are statistically poor, they will be overlooked.
The Constitutional Court made it clear that Davy’s recommendations are not legally binding and “are not in conformity with the medical standard in professional law.” Furthermore, the Court noted the potential risks related to the assessment of opportunities that might result from the recommendations.
The legislature should develop regulations
Constitutional Court judges said it must be ensured that “decisions are made solely on the basis of the current and short-term prospect of survival”. In their view, the legislator has several options for effectively addressing the risk of disability discrimination when granting intensive care measures during a pandemic. Examples include the principle of group decision making or the organization of on-site support. The Constitutional Court said: “The legislature must decide what are the appropriate procedures.”
The constitutional complaint had been pending in Karlsruhe since mid-2020. It was also related to a request for an interim injunction, which the judges rejected, arguing that the proceedings raised difficult issues that could not be dealt with urgently.
We are glad you are with us. Subscribe to the Onet newsletter to receive the most valuable content from us
“Coffee enthusiast. Troublemaker. Incurable introvert. Subtly charming twitter scholar. Award-winning social mediaholic. Internet buff.”