No refund of non-prescription drugs

Lawsuit of a chronic sufferer dismissed by the Federal Constitutional Court: Non-prescription drugs must continue to be paid out of pocket

16/01/2013

In Germany, patients have to pay for over-the-counter medicines out of their own pocket, even if the doctor has issued a prescription for a drug. That applies as well, „if a patient suffers from a serious chronic illness“, The Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe currently ruled. The current legislation was thus confirmed by the supreme constitutional guardians and a claim of a person concerned for the main hearing not allowed (Federal Constitutional Court, AZ: 1 BvR 69/09).

The regulation according to which patients have to pay their own prescribed but over-the-counter medicines was confirmed today by the Federal Constitutional Court. With today's decision, a constitutional complaint of a chronically ill patient was rejected.

Even with chronic illnesses no reimbursement
In the specific case a permanently ill patient complained. His doctor regularly prescribes non-prescription medicines for the chronic respiratory disease. According to their own information, the patient is born „each month by costs of 28.80 euros“. Since the health care reform in 2004, non-prescription drugs are no longer funded by the statutory health insurance, even if prescribed by a doctor. The funds were removed from the catalog of benefits. These include, for example, cough syrup, pain medications or throat pills.

Earlier, the Federal Social Court had dismissed the man's complaint. Because the chances of success on confirmation of the claim were not there, the complaint was not admitted to the Federal Constitutional Court. „The financial burden on the insured person is proportionate to the goal of containing healthcare costs“, it says in the resolution published today. A so-called special offer would not provide cash patients, since the amounts „to be spent on oneself“. On the other hand, it would be a special sacrifice if insured persons had to provide additional benefits for others in addition. This fact could not be recognized by the Constitutional Court.

Principle of equal treatment not violated
According to the judges, the principle of equal treatment enshrined in the Basic Law is also not violated. The plaintiff had argued that the Basic Law on Equal Treatment would be violated because the cost of prescription drugs would have to be borne by health insurers, but the non-prescription medicines themselves would have to be paid. Although the court recognizes that the differentiation between prescription and over-the-counter medicines not only serves for the medical supervision of highly effective drugs, but is also a significant factor in reducing cash expenditure. However, be that fact „relatively“, because „The over-the-counter medicines are usually much cheaper than the prescription drugs.“ In the case of serious illnesses, it would also be possible to take on the responsibility of the health insurance funds, which also pay for non-prescription medicines after an application.

In addition, could be paid for serious diseases and non-prescription drugs exceptionally by the health insurance companies. The court could not recognize a special case of hardship. The applicant has not stated that his own case „socially unreasonable“ be. However, a judgment of the Federal Social Court in Kassel had recently ruled that Hartz IV recipients have no claim for reimbursement from their job center. Again, the victims would have to contact the health insurance. (Sb)

Also read:
Non-prescription medicines by no means harmless
No prescription-free cold remedies for children
Coughing can indicate serious illness

Image: Paul-Georg Meister