Schubert Michael, Schian Marcus, Viehmeier Sarah
Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft für Rehabilitation e. V. (BAR), Solmsstraße 18, 60486, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland.
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2016 Sep;59(9):1053-9. doi: 10.1007/s00103-016-2393-9.
The federal participation law (Bundesteilhabegesetz - BTHG) is one of the largest efforts in the last 15 years to reform the legal participation rights of people with disabilities. In particular, a number of enhancements are planned in the overall benefits law in Part 1 of Book IX in the Social Code (Sozialgesetzbuch - SGB), which applies to all rehabilitation carriers including general provisions and standards for needs assessment. This paper deals with the implications of these provisions and interacting standards, based on the draft bill of April 2016.The discussion takes place against the background of the regulatory objectives formulated in the ministerial draft itself, jurisprudential expertise on the effects of the current legal norms of the SGB IX as well as relevant professional political developments and statements by various stakeholders.The analysis shows a clear political commitment to increase the requirements for needs assessment in the overall law of the SGB IX and to express these more effectively. The draft bill seeks not only to modify procedures subsequent to the application for rehabilitation benefits, but also to precisely set out provisions on instruments for needs assessment in a new § 13. Common principles for these instruments of needs assessment should increase the cooperation, coordination and convergence among rehabilitation carriers.Nevertheless, with regard to the proposed regulatory texts, there is doubt that the objectives set by the draft bill itself will be achieved. For example, the required common principles for needs assessment are to be agreed upon based on the existing special legislation for the different rehabilitation carriers, without the SGB IX setting its own binding standards or framework principles. In addition, it lacks clear legal guidelines for the professional practice to make use of the bio-psycho-social model of the WHO and the ICF in the process of needs assessment. As a consequence the ICF cannot serve as a legally standardized reference point.
联邦参与法（《联邦参与法》-BTHG）是过去15年来为改革残疾人法定参与权利所做出的最大努力之一。特别是，计划对《社会法典》（Sozialgesetzbuch - SGB）第九编第一部分的整体福利法进行多项改进，该法适用于所有康复服务机构，包括需求评估的一般规定和标准。本文基于2016年4月的法案草案，探讨了这些规定和相互关联的标准的影响。讨论是在部长草案本身制定的监管目标、关于SGB IX现行法律规范效果的法学专业知识以及各利益相关方的相关专业政治发展和声明的背景下进行的。分析表明，在SGB IX的整体法律中，明确的政治承诺是提高需求评估的要求并更有效地表达这些要求。法案草案不仅旨在修改申请康复福利后的程序，还在新的第13条中精确阐述了需求评估工具的规定。这些需求评估工具的共同原则应加强康复服务机构之间的合作、协调和趋同。然而，对于拟议的监管文本，有人怀疑法案草案本身设定的目标能否实现。例如，需求评估所需的共同原则要根据不同康复服务机构现有的特别立法来商定，而SGB IX并未设定自己具有约束力的标准或框架原则。此外，在需求评估过程中利用世卫组织和国际功能、残疾和健康分类的生物心理社会模型缺乏明确的专业实践法律指南。因此，国际功能、残疾和健康分类不能作为法定标准化的参考点。
