In line with the genuine spirit of scientific research, notably cultivating discussion, we make some reflections on the article of Stan et al. The main purpose of our commentary is to nuance but also to refute some of their observations and conclusions. First, the original purpose of both the European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) and of the European legal framework it forms part of seem to have been overlooked. Therefore, we argue that the assumption made by the authors, which served as the basis of the article, namely the European legislature’s promise the EHIC would contribute to European social integration, is erroneous. Second, we argue that there is insufficient evidence that the EHIC would amplify social inequalities across regions and classes. One could even argue that the EHIC is a visual symbol of the social dimension of the European Union. In practice, not only the EHIC but also the reimbursement principles as defined under the Coordination Regulations 883/2004 and 987/2009 are of great importance. Without these rules, there would be a major barrier for all EU citizens in terms of access and affordability of unplanned necessary cross-border healthcare, and consequently to the free movement of persons.

本着真正的科学研究精神，特别是培养讨论的精神，我们对斯坦等人的文章进行了一些反思。我们评论的主要目的是细微差别，但也是反驳他们的一些观察和结论。首先，欧洲健康保险卡 (EHIC) 及其构成的欧洲法律框架的最初目的似乎都被忽视了。因此，我们认为，作为本文基础的作者做出的假设，即欧洲立法机构承诺 EHIC 将有助于欧洲社会一体化，是错误的。其次，我们认为没有足够的证据表明 EHIC 会放大跨地区和跨阶级的社会不平等。甚至有人可能会争辩说，EHIC 是欧盟社会层面的一种视觉象征。在实践中，不仅是 EHIC，而且根据协调条例 883/2004 和 987/2009 定义的偿还原则也非常重要。如果没有这些规则，所有欧盟公民在获得计划外的必要跨境医疗保健的可及性和可负担性方面将面临重大障碍，从而影响人员的自由流动。