Sirine goes to a doctor after obtaining an appointment. Once at the office, the secretary asks her to take a seat, but when it’s her turn, the doctor refuses to examine her if she doesn’t remove her headscarf, stating that his office is secular.
Sirine leaves the office wondering how she could have reacted.

What does the law say?

Religious freedom of patients

The religious freedom of patients is a fundamental right guaranteed by numerous national and international texts, notably by Article 1 of the Constitution of October 4, 1948, Articles 9 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Article 13 of the Treaty establishing the European Community.

Any restriction on a fundamental freedom must be justified by the nature of the care and be proportionate to the intended purpose.

Article L1110-3 of the Public Health Code specifies that no person can be subject to discrimination in access to prevention or care.

Consequently, any restriction must be justified by the nature of the tasks to be performed and proportionate to the intended purpose, and general and absolute prohibitions are forbidden.

If this is not the case, we are then dealing with differential treatment towards women wearing headscarves.

The Penal Code provides for and severely punishes the offense of religious discrimination in Articles 225-1 paragraph 1 and 225-2, which state respectively that:

“Any distinction made between individuals based on (…) their belonging or supposed belonging to (…) a particular religion constitutes discrimination“;

“Discrimination as defined in Articles 225-1 (…) committed against a natural or legal person is punishable by three years’ imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 Euros when it consists of:
1° Refusing to provide a good or service; (…)
4° Making the provision of a good or service subject to a condition based on one of the elements referred to in Article 225-1 (…).
When the discriminatory refusal provided for in 1° is committed in a place open to the public or for the purpose of denying access to it, the penalties are increased to five years’ imprisonment and a fine of 75,000 Euros“.

The Code of Ethics for Doctors

The various codes of ethics for health professions (doctors, dental surgeons, midwives, nurses, physiotherapists, pharmacists, etc.) also provide for a principle of non-discrimination and remind that the patient must be treated with dignity.

Respect for the human person implies that patients are treated with courtesy and kindness, and that they are treated with dignity and without distinction. Therefore, the practitioner cannot discriminate against patients because they belong to a particular ethnicity or religion, and the practitioner must refrain from any disrespectful behavior.

Professionals who violate these legal and ethical obligations are liable to disciplinary, financial, and/or criminal sanctions.

The Code of Ethics for Doctors, for example, states in Article R.4127-2 that: “The doctor, in the service of the individual and public health, carries out his mission with respect for human life, the person and their dignity“.

Furthermore, Article R.4127-7 of the same code also provides for a principle of non-discrimination: ” The doctor must listen to, examine, advise or treat with the same conscience all persons regardless of their origin, customs and family situation, their belonging or non-belonging to a particular ethnicity, nation or religion, their disability or state of health, their reputation or the feelings he may have towards them. He must provide them with assistance in all circumstances. He must never depart from a correct and attentive attitude towards the person being examined. ”

Consequently, the doctor cannot invoke the principle of secularism to refuse to treat Sirine.

Indeed, ethics require the doctor to provide care to any person requesting it and in any situation. While specific situations allow a doctor to refuse care, which are strictly regulated by Article R.4127-47 of the Public Health Code, they cannot be based on discriminatory grounds.

Therefore:

• Any proven discriminatory behavior is subject to disciplinary action.
• Any discriminatory attitude hinders access to healthcare, can lead to detrimental refusal of care for the patient, and constitutes a refusal of care.

Moreover, in Sirine’s case, the said doctor did not take the necessary measures to ensure continuity of care.

What should I do?

If you experience such discrimination at a doctor’s office, here are some tips:

• Record the statements in question if possible (without sharing them)
• Ask for the reason justifying the refusal of access to care
• Contact the Defender of Rights:
• Contact the Defender of Rights | Défenseur des Droits
• Report the discrimination to the relevant Medical Board
• Contact the director of the local health insurance organization
• File a complaint or an incident report at the police station or gendarmerie of your choice
• Contact Equitas, which can provide help and assistance

Applicable references:

Article 1 of the Constitution of October 4, 1948; Articles 9 and 14 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights; Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article 13 of the Treaty establishing the European Community.

Deliberation of the High Authority for the Fight against Discrimination and for Equality No. 2008-32 of March 3, 2008;

Articles 225-1 paragraph 1 and 225-2 of the Criminal Code; Medical Code of Ethics: Articles R.4127-2 and R.4127-7.

Article L1110-3 of the Public Health Code.