No deposit policy

Ian Alfredo Magno

RECENTLY, this year, President Rodrigo Duterte signed into law Republic Act 10932, otherwise known as the Act Strengthening the Anti-Hospital Deposit Law.  It effectively amended Batas Pambansa Bilang 702 (as amended by RA 8344), which prohibits hospitals from demanding deposits or advance payments before attending to a particular patient.

It is with high spirits that President Digong’s perennial critic, the Commission on Human Rights, welcomed this new law when it released an official statement lauding the same, saying: “… its passage advances every Filipino’s right to health or more specifically broadening the access to urgent or emergency health services – guaranteed in both domestic laws and international conventions.”

The Commission continued by stating: “The passage of Republic Act 10932 shows the current administration’s political and moral will to address the issue of health care, and does take cognizance of human rights concerns of Filipinos.”

This latter statement, quite surprisingly, shows a genial and kinder gesture on the part of the Commission towards President Digong whom it has constantly critiqued for his no-nonsense anti-drug war campaign.

In a way, RA 10932 similarly bolsters RA 9439 otherwise known as the Anti-Hospital Detention Law, which prohibits health care facilities from detaining patients who have fully or partially recovered because of non-payment, in part or in full, of hospital bills.  It should be emphasized, nonetheless, that this law applies only to charity patients, and does not cover patients in private rooms (who are usually the moneyed ones).

RA 10932 increased the fine (imposable upon hospital personnel or executives), which ranges from P100,000 to P300,000 – compared to the previouslyimposed fine of P20,000 to P100,000 only.  Moreover, if proven that the violation is done in pursuance to a particular instruction from the hospital management, the fine to imposed shall be a rocketing P500,000 to P1,000,000.  The penalty of imprisonment remains the same as in the old law, which is four to six years – solely or in addition to the penalty of fine.

One crucial update in RA 10932 is Section 5 which provides for a presumed culpability on the part of hospital personnel, officers and medical practitioners: “Sec. 5.  Presumption of Liability – In the event of death, permanent disability, serious impairment of the health condition of the patient-complainant, or in the case of a pregnant woman, permanent injury of loss of her unborn child, proceeding from the denial of his or her admission to a health facility pursuant to a policy or practice of demanding deposits or advance payments for confinement or treatment, a presumption of liability shall arise against the hospital, medical clinic, and the official, medical practitioner, or employee involved.”

Local governments have likewise been given a role under this amended legislation. Where there is no ambulance available in the health facility, and the patient needs to be transferred to another clinic or hospital, the local government where such health facility is located must provide an emergency vehicle free of charge.

(Ian Alfredo T. Magno is a legal officer at Philhealth and a practicing lawyer based in Cagayan de Oro. E-mail: ianalfredom@gmail.com)