{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016968325791855202, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004524886877828055, 'mean_word_length': 4.939597315436242, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Avoiding another directive: the unstable politics of European Union cross-border health care law

Abstract The European Union's (EU) 2011 Directive on cross-border patient mobility codifies the right of any EU citizen to travel abroad for treatment and be reimbursed on the same terms as they would be at home. Governments hoped it would end the string of court cases that had reshaped EU health law but this article argues that it is likely to produce yet more judicial challenges. Patient mobility is an attractive idea with unclear definitions and divergent implementation. In many cases, providers, insurers and governments will not communicate and leave the patient with a bill – almost daring the patient to sue, and the courts to make more policy. Governments should try to prevent this by investing in coordination and alternative redress for patients who might otherwise sue.