Background: Transgender individuals experience limited access to healthcare. This results not least from experiences of discrimination to which they are exposed in the health system. These contribute to transgender individuals having poorer health than cis individuals, i.e. individuals whose sex assigned at birth is in line with their gender identity. It is an ethical duty to take effective measures to minimize inequalities in medical care. At best, such measures should also be assessed as appropriate from the perspective of those affected in order to be accepted and thus effective. It is therefore important to know whether measures touch on the subjectively assumed reasons for experiences of discrimination. Hence, to be able to take appropriate measures, it is important to identify the reasons that transgender individuals see as causal for their experiences of discrimination in healthcare. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 German transgender individuals and asked them about their own experiences of discrimination in healthcare and their assumptions on the reasons for discrimination. We analyzed the responses using the method of structured qualitative content analysis. Results: 13 transgender individuals reported experiences of discrimination in healthcare. These emanated from different professional groups and took place in trans-specific as well as general medical settings. We were able to identify a total of 12 reasons that transgender individuals see as causal for their experiences of discrimination: (1) internalized trans-hostility and “protection” of cis individuals, (2) lack of knowledge/uncertainties regarding transition, (3) “protection” of a binary worldview, (4) binary worldview in medicine, (5) structural deficits, (6) asymmetric interactions with specialists, (7) current political debate, (8) view of transgender individuals as a “burden for society”, (9) objectification, (10) homophobia, (11) misogyny/androcentrism and (12) discrimination as reaction to discrimination. Conclusions: German transgender individuals have a very differentiated picture regarding their subjective reasons for experiencing discrimination in healthcare. Overall, disrespect regarding gender identity and a confrontation with foreignness seems to be seen as the decisive factor. Thus, it is not enough to focus only on measures that aim to remedy the information deficit on the part of medical providers. Measures must be taken that can create a granting and respectful attitude towards transgender individuals.

Persons with schizophrenia are vulnerable regarding human rights violations. The aim of this research is to systematically analyse judgements by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) involving persons with schizophrenia. A systematic search of judgements by the ECtHR, using the search term ‘schizophrenia’. Descriptive statistics and a qualitative thematic analysis were performed. A total of n = 105 judgements were included, originating in n = 29 countries. Article 5 (Right to liberty and security) of the European Convention on Human Rights was ruled by the ECtHR to have been violated in 45.7% of judgements, Article 3 (Prohibition of torture) in 20.0% and Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life) in 19.0%. Relevant themes were inadequate access to mental health care, especially in prisons and during police operations, involuntary confinement, detention and ill-treatment as a risk factor for psychosis, the right to family life versus the rights of others, extradition/expulsion and protection of other persons’ human rights against violent behaviour by persons with schizophrenia. Persons with schizophrenia often do not receive adequate treatment and are especially vulnerable in prisons, where ill-treatment can be an additional risk factor. They can have both offender and victim status. The judgements suggest that the ECtHR has a balanced view on involuntary confinement. National legislation and internal hospital guidelines should be written in a manner to help minimise human rights violations against persons with schizophrenia.

Introduction: Due to cultural, language, or legal barriers, members of social minority groups face challenges in access to healthcare. Equality of healthcare provision can be achieved through raised diversity awareness and diversity competency of healthcare professionals. The aim of this research was to explore the experiences and attitudes of healthcare professionals toward the issue of social diversity and equal access to healthcare in Croatia, Germany, Poland, and Slovenia.Methods: The data reported come from semi-structured interviews with n = 39 healthcare professionals. The interviews were analyzed using the methods of content analysis and thematic analysis.Results: Respondents in all four countries acknowledged that socioeconomic factors and membership in a minority group have an impact on access to healthcare services, but its scope varies depending on the country. Underfunding of healthcare, language barriers, inadequate cultural training or lack of interpersonal competencies, and lack of institutional support were presented as major challenges in the provision of diversity-responsive healthcare. The majority of interviewees did not perceive direct systemic exclusion of minority groups; however, they reported cases of individual discrimination through the presence of homophobia or racism.Discussion: To improve the situation, systemic interventions are needed that encompass all levels of healthcare systems – from policies to addressing existing challenges at the healthcare facility level to improving the attitudes and skills of individual healthcare providers.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic constitutes not only a danger for public health, but may also threaten civil liberties. Looking at the examples of recent events in Poland and Hungary, the authors argue that governments may misuse pandemic for their political advantage, thus endangering public health. Political decisions taken to stem the spread of pandemics should be limited and strictly proportionate to the situation.

With the introduction of an artificial intelligence-based dashboard into the clinic, the project SURGE-Ahead responds to the importance of improving perioperative geriatric patient treatment and continuity of care. The use of artificial intelligence to process and analyze data automatically, aims at an evidence-based evaluation of the patient’s health condition and recommending treatment options. However, its development and introduction raise ethical questions. To ascertain professional perspectives on the clinical use of the dashboard, we have conducted 19 semi-structured qualitative interviews with head physicians, computer scientists, jurists, and ethicists. The application of a qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis enabled the detection of main ethical concerns, chances, and limitations. These ethical considerations were categorized: changes of the patient-physician relationship and the current social reality are expected, causing de-skilling and an active participation of the artificial intelligence. The interviewees anticipated a redistribution of human resources, time, knowledge, and experiences as well as expenses and financing. Concerns of privacy, accuracy, transparency, and explainability were stated, and an insufficient data basis, an intensifying of existing inequalities and systematic discrimination considering a fair access emphasized. Concluding, the patient-physician relationship, social reality, redistribution of resources, fair access, as well as data-related aspects of the artificial intelligence-based system could conflict with the ethical principles of autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and social justice. To respond to these ethical concerns, a responsible use of the dashboard and a critical verification of therapy suggestions is mandatory, and the application limited by questions at the end of life and taking life-changing decisions.