Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
The right to not be refused emergency medical treatment in South Africa
Emergency medical treatment is not expressly recognised as a right under international law, but it is implied under the right to the highest attainable standard of health as set out in article 12 of the ICESCR. Some states, including South Africa, have recognised emergency medical treatment as a rig...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Department of Public Law
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Emergency medical treatment is not expressly recognised as a right under international law, but it is implied under the right to the highest attainable standard of health as set out in article 12 of the ICESCR. Some states, including South Africa, have recognised emergency medical treatment as a right in its own respect. In South Africa, Section 27(3) of the Constitution provides that nobody may be refused emergency medical treatment. This thesis shows that while this is a constitutionally entrenched right and there is a legislative framework in South Africa giving effect to this right, there are gaps in the law that affect the effective implementation of this right. The concept of emergency medical treatment, or a medical emergency, remains ill-defined in South African legislation. The implications of this right for both state and private healthcare providers remain underdeveloped. The interests of the most vulnerable members of society are not adequately protected in legislation governing emergency medical treatment. Lastly, many people in South Africa do not have access to emergency medical treatment. |
|---|