Kostelka: Expensive special nutrition

Expensive special nutrition: diet or medication?

The 19-month-old Luca suffers from a severe neurodermatitis and intense food allergies against egg protein, lacto protein, wheat flour, rye flour and a light intolerance against soy. The itchiness, the scratching and the inflammations hardly ever stop. Each single contact with his skin can lead to allergic reactions. Therefore, he has to follow a strict diet plan and needs expensive special nutrition.

Luca has to be cared for 24/7 and has to be under supervision all the time in order to prevent him from scratching. Besides the permanent care and the mental burden, his parents have to fight for financial support for his special nutrition for the years 2009 and 2010.

This financial support was authorised by the Styrian health insurance carrier for the first year only. After numerous problems with the authorities the family received 4.500 euro for the year 2009. Altogether, the costs amounted to 6.000 euro. For the year 2010 health authorities rejected a financial support: In their opinion Luca was not an infant anymore and should be fed with normal nutrition.

Ombudsman Peter Kostelka criticised this decision and said that in fact a state hospital had requested special nutrition for Luca. Therefore, even if he was already over 12 months old, the specific nutrition was not a diet but a medication. A representative of the health insurance carrier did not agree with Ombudsman Kostelka but still offered a payment. Ombudsman Peter Kostelka: „This family simply does not have the time to go through long and tiresome proceedings at court. Therefore this offer is important for the family although it is actually their right to receive support by the health insurance carrier.“

Fiscal authorities demand 16.500 euro

The 24-year-old Thomas suffers from the Tourette syndrome, a neuropsychiatric disease. As an adolescent, people in the public and in school reacted with incomprehension and rejection, which led to an enhancement of the abnormalities. Due to this severe illness, his parents were granted a higher family allowance in June 1999. Nobody thought that Thomas would once be able to succeed in professional life. But Thomas finished his education, became a gardener and moved out of his parents’ home.

His family informed the fiscal authorities explicitly about this development and asked them to transfer the family allowance to their son’s bank account. Nevertheless, the authorities only took notice of his change of residence without controlling whether he would still be entitled to receive the higher family allowance.

The symptoms of the disease got worse when Thomas started working and he had to move back to his family home. An expensive brain surgery caused a paralysis of his leg and he was not able to work anymore. The costs for his care and therapies amounted up to 1.700 euros each month.

The situation got even worse when his parents received a letter by the fiscal authorities asking the family to pay back 16,500 euro since they were not entitled to receive the higher family allowance starting from January 2005.

Ombudsman Peter Kostelka is outraged: „The family did clearly play by the rules. The fiscal authorities should have checked whether Thomas and his family were still entitled to receive a higher family allowance. To pay back such a high amount of money is too hard for the family.“ After the intervention of the Ombudsman the Ministry of Economy, Family and Youth informed Thomas and his family that they would not have to pay back the originally requested amount.