There is a rhythm to how a healthcare system breathes — the steady pulse of family doctors who know patients by name, and the rapid urgency of emergency rooms where every second matters. In Slovenia this week, lawmakers are turning their attention to the space between these worlds.
In the National Assembly’s ongoing session, members of parliament are set to consider a proposed amendment to the law on the medical service that would make it easier for urgent care physicians to transition into family medicine. The change is part of a broader effort to address staffing challenges in the healthcare sector and ensure that patients have consistent access to medical care across settings.
Under the current proposal, specialists in urgent medicine who wish to switch to a family medicine specialization would be able to do so without experiencing a drop in salary — a barrier that previously discouraged many from making such a change. In practical terms, if passed, urgent care doctors with long careers behind them could enter family practice while retaining earnings comparable to their specialist status, rather than moving back to the pay scale of typical trainees.
The amendment also includes other adjustments to the medical service law, such as clarifying the grounds for revoking a medical license and introducing the ability to run additional specialist training competitions when demand exceeds available spots. Another provision seeks to require doctors selected in national specialist calls to work within the public health network during their specialization period.
Supporters of the proposal frame it as a response to well‑documented staffing imbalances. Slovenia’s health sector has struggled with shortages of family doctors, leading to limited access for patients and heavier loads on emergency departments. Advocates argue that easing the transition from urgent medicine to primary care could help relieve pressure on urgent care units by strengthening the front line of family medicine.
Critics caution that legislative reform alone cannot resolve deeper systemic issues — such as the overall number of healthcare professionals, working conditions, and long‑term retention — but acknowledge the amendment’s intent to smooth a pathway for experienced practitioners. Independent observers and patient advocates emphasize that access to consistent primary care remains a key factor in reducing unnecessary emergency visits and improving the patient experience.
For many in the medical community, the discussion highlights the evolving nature of health professions and the ways in which policy can help — or hinder — career flexibility. As MPs debate the text, families, caregivers, and clinicians alike watch closely, mindful that the shape of healthcare often depends on how well different parts of the system connect.
AI Image Disclaimer Visuals are created with AI tools and are not real photographs.
Sources Siol.net Preberi.si Svet 24 (Policy context and commentary drawn from contemporary reporting)