Official medical examination (amtsärztliche Untersuchung)
Gesundheitsamt · Official medical service
The most important sentence about this examination is the one that is read least often: you receive a copy. § 48 of the Federal Civil Service Act (Bundesbeamtengesetz, BBG) provides, for federal civil servants, that the doctor communicates to the authority only the material findings and reasons, to the extent that knowledge of them is necessary for the decision, and does so in a sealed envelope. And Abs. 3 expressly provides that the doctor sends the person concerned a duplicate of this notification. Only where medical reasons preclude this does the duplicate go to a named person of trust instead of to you. The widespread claim that the assessment goes exclusively to the employer and that one receives nothing is, accordingly, not correct. For state and local authority employees, the corresponding provisions of the state civil service acts apply, which follow this same pattern — if in doubt, explicitly ask for the duplicate rather than assuming it is not available.
The second point that determines the outcome is the question to be assessed. The medical officer does not answer the question “is this person healthy?”, but the question set out in the examination order — usually the question of health suitability for a particular career path or of fitness for service. Two things follow from this: the scope of the examination is governed by this question, and a pre-existing condition is not, in itself, a ground for rejection. What matters is the prognosis — whether premature unfitness for service is to be expected with predominant probability.
Equally important is how little the authority learns. § 48 Abs. 2 BBG permits the doctor to communicate to the authority only the material findings and reasons, and even that only to the extent that knowledge of them is necessary for the decision — transmission takes place in a sealed envelope. The complete medical history is expressly not included. Anyone who fears that the examination will result in the entire file being handed to the personnel department considerably overestimates its scope.
And finally: an assessment is not an administrative act. It decides nothing; it merely prepares the employer's decision. What can be challenged, therefore, is not the assessment but the decision based on it — the refusal to appoint or compulsory retirement. Anyone who wants to proceed against the assessment itself is directing the legal remedy against the wrong document.
