Keywords: patients’ rights, negative advance directive, EU Patients’ Rights Directive, National Contact Points for cross-border healthcare

"Moving towards European Convergence in Classical Individual Patients’ Rights Can the New Individual Patients’ Rights to Information under Article 6(3) of Directive 2011/24/ EU contribute?" 

What might happen if a Dutch woman were to travel abroad for orthopaedic surgery with a Dutch negative advance directive, stating her wishes regarding the refusal of her informed consent for life-sustaining resuscitation in case she has a heart attack? In an era in which the access to safe and high-quality cross-border healthcare is facilitated under the Patients’ Rights Directive of the European Union (EU), health professionals have increasingly been challenged with practical and legal questions regarding the legal validity of a negative advance directive in another EU Member State. The overarching question in this legal dissertation addresses the added value of the EU Patients’ Rights Directive in managing national divergence in the protection of classical individual patients’ rights. It specifically addresses the added value of Article 6(3), which focuses on the information provision on patients’ rights through the National Contact Points for cross-border healthcare. The PhD research shows that the implementation of Article 6(3) by three EU Member States studied has been minimal, and this results in unintended risks for the protection of classical individual patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare. In the final Chapter, several recommendations are provided, which aim to make full use, in cross-border healthcare, of the opportunities of Article 6(3) of the EU Patients’ Rights Directive.

Click here for the live stream.