Healthcare based on need, not judicial status - A qualitative study of professionals’ view on EU-migrants’ right to healthcare in Sweden

Abstract

The aim of this research was to investigate right to healthcare for deprived EU-migrants in Sweden. This was done by gathering the views of professionals working with EU-migrants. The objectives were to explore their view of the obstacles EU-migrants met when accessing healthcare in Sweden and explore which actions the participants perceived were necessary to undertake. Seven professionals were interviewed using qualitative semi-structured method. The participants performed work in Sweden’s two largest cities; Stockholm and Gothenburg. A thematic analysis was applied to the interviews to determine coherent categories and themes. Two theoretical approaches were used in the analysis. Those were social justice and social citizenship. Findings from the research showed that access to healthcare for EU-migrants differed between the cities, where access was better in Gothenburg than in Stockholm. It was also found that the right to healthcare for EU-migrants is not subscribed in any legal entitlements in Sweden, consequently EU-migrants are excluded from subsidized healthcare due to their legal status. Obstacles for access to healthcare were identified to be financial, legal, gatekeepers and administrative barriers. The participants indicated that the non-access to healthcare had negative implications on EU-migrants’ life. Participants highlighted that under international law EU-migrants should have the right to healthcare. It was also found that children to EU-migrants did not have access to healthcare in Sweden. The participants emphasized that legal entitlements would be a great improvement for the health of EUmigrants. They also stressed that the EU should take more responsibility for the situation and that Sweden does not follow international law human rights standards. The participants saw the improvements as necessities to follow international law, promote equality and help those who are most in need. The result also suggested that healthcare should be based on need and not judicial status.