Part I — Situation overview

On the evening of 26 October 2026, the Government’s decision on the Expert Advisory and Coordination Panel, set up to review the situation of babies and toddlers stuck in hospital and to manage their care in an integrated way, was published in the Magyar Közlöny, the official gazette (24.hu, Telex). The panel is chaired by Szilvia Gyurkó, State Secretary for Children’s Rights and Child Protection at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Family. Its members include the Ministry of Education and Children’s Affairs, the Ministry of Health, the National Directorate General for Hospitals (OKFŐ, the maintainer of state hospitals), the guardianship department of the Budapest Capital Government Office, the Directorate General for Social Affairs and Child Protection, the National Child Protection Service and the Margit Slachta National Institute for Social Policy. Alongside them, ten invited civil, professional or interest-representation organisations also take part (Index, 24.hu). The panel meets at least quarterly, and its members receive neither remuneration nor reimbursement of expenses (Telex, Portfolio). The inaugural meeting must be convened within thirty days, and the first situation assessment and solution concept must be submitted within sixty days after that. The tasks include assessing the need for legislative amendments, a hospital child-protection volunteer programme, professional protocols ensuring development and rehabilitation, and examining a day-care service called “Pöttömke Bölcsőde” (roughly “Tiny Tots Crèche”), operating within the framework of workplace crèches under separate rules (Index, 24.hu).

Different figures are circulating on the scale of the problem. Vilmos Kátai-Németh, Minister of Social Affairs and Family, said earlier that more than 320 children were stuck in hospital, for more than 105 days on average (Index, 24.hu, Portfolio). Telex mentions 301 children, waiting mainly in Budapest and in the eastern half of the country, while at the government briefing of 12 September the figure was 358. According to Telex, the National Assembly adopted the child protection legislative package on 13 October. It sets an eight-day deadline for the guardianship authority, that is, the guardianship bodies of the government offices, to carry out a situation assessment and draw up an action plan. MIAK published an analysis of the bill on 22 September: at that time it asked for a target value, annual reporting to parliament, quarterly data on meeting the deadline and an aftercare timetable. It wrote about the government report on 13 September.

MIAK’s reading: the law provided a procedural deadline, and the decision a coordination forum. Neither says how quickly and by how much the number of children living in hospital must fall. In six weeks three different figures have appeared, without a common definition. The panel’s first task is therefore a yardstick against which the 90-day concept can be measured. The decision is not in itself a piece of legislation; it binds only government bodies. The panel’s strength therefore depends on how public and how accountable its work is.

Part II — Foundations in the literature

Three sources provide a framework for what to expect from the new panel. The European Commission’s 2021 action plan The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan, the implementation programme of the European Pillar of Social Rights, regards investing in children as the main tool against the intergenerational transmission of disadvantage. It also provides a financial rule: part of member states’ European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) resources must be devoted to measures against child poverty and to implementing the European Child Guarantee. Astrid Eriksen and her co-authors are researchers at the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. In their study Policy Brief 67 on services for children in vulnerable situations, they highlight two conditions on the basis of the experience of five European countries. One is a genuine coordination body linking the health, social and education sectors; the other is cross-sector data infrastructure. The World Bank’s World Development Report 2015, the organisation’s flagship annual publication, shows in its chapter on early childhood development that in the first years a consistent caregiver relationship responsive to the child is one of the foundations of later abilities. The detailed treatment of the literature — by author, with quotations — is in section 6.4 Literature in detail.

Part III — MIAK’s concrete proposal

MIAK proposes three measurable measures, each tied to the decision’s 30 + 60-day timetable. The September proposals concerned the law and the guardianship procedure. The present ones strengthen the mandate and accountability of the new panel.

3.1 Monthly public data series by hospital (decision at the inaugural meeting, by the end of November 2026 at the latest; first publication by mid-December)

MIAK proposes that the panel adopt a uniform definition at its inaugural meeting: a child counts as stuck in hospital from the day on which, according to the attending physician, they no longer need to stay for health reasons. Building on this, OKFŐ should publish the data monthly, hospital by hospital. These are: the number of children stuck in hospital by age group (under 1 year, 1–3 years, over 3 years), the median number of days since the end of healthcare treatment, the number of those waiting for more than 90 days, the obstacle to moving on (no foster care place, ongoing guardianship procedure, special health needs), and the direction of placement (birth family, relative, foster parent, children’s home, adoption). Where the number of cases is below five, the data must be published in aggregated form so that the children cannot be identified. The September MIAK proposal measured county-level compliance with the guardianship authority’s eight-day deadline; this one measures the hospital side, that is, the outcome. Together the two show where the child’s path gets stuck. The data series is the child protection counterpart of the institution-by-institution reporting of E3 waiting-list transparency. It follows the data-linking logic of the E4 prevention data programme and the DM1 demographic data platform. According to the Observatory’s study (see 6.4.2), cross-sector data infrastructure is a precondition of coordination, not a supplement to it. The agenda and minutes of the panel’s meetings must also be made public.

3.2 Numerical targets and quarterly milestones in the concept (when the concept is submitted, by the end of January 2027 at the latest)

The decision expects a situation assessment and a proposed solution, but does not require the concept to contain a numerical target. MIAK proposes that the concept set three target values, using the first monthly data under 3.1 as the baseline. First: the number of children stuck in hospital should halve within 12 months of the concept’s adoption. Second: by the end of 2027 the median time between the end of healthcare treatment and placement should fall below 30 days. Third: by the end of 2028 no child under 3 should wait in hospital for more than 90 days. Every measure in the concept should have a responsible body, a cost estimate and a deadline. At its at least quarterly meetings, the panel should compare delivery with the milestones and publish the result in a short public progress report. If delivery falls short in two consecutive quarters, the panel must propose corrective action. The decision rests with the Government, or, in the case of a legislative amendment, with the National Assembly. The September proposal asked for the 2029 target values to be written into the law; this is the implementation level, which can start immediately even without the law. The proposal is an application of the indicator-based national action plan of SZ12 and of the case-handling goal of the SZ7 dignity-based social policy. According to the EU action plan (see 6.4.1), a numerical target turns policy towards results.

3.3 EU funding for the foster care network and safeguards for the transitional tools (funding plan with the concept, call for proposals in the first half of 2027)

The decision calls for an assessment of the factors hindering placement in family or family-substitute care. The best known of these is the shortage of foster parents who will also take a baby, so a substantial part of the concept is the expansion of the network. MIAK proposes that the concept include a separate funding plan for the recruitment, training and remuneration of foster parents who take in babies and toddlers. This should include a standby group: foster parents who are paid even when they have no child with them at the moment, and who can take in a baby within a few days. The target for the expansion should be at least as large as the baseline headcount under 3.1. Alongside the domestic budget, the funding should be secured from the ESF+ envelope earmarked for child poverty and the Child Guarantee (see 6.4.1). Its use must be tracked with outcome indicators in line with the cohesion monitoring of SZ14. The two transitional tools need safeguards. The Pöttömke Bölcsőde should be developmental day care, not a way of prolonging the hospital stay: the concept should lay down that a crèche place may not delay placement, and that a mandatory review is due after two years. In the volunteer programme an official certificate of good conduct, training and professional supervision by the hospital social worker are mandatory. The same volunteer should regularly visit the same child, because according to the World Bank report (see 6.4.3) what matters is a constant, responsive relationship. This is an application of the SZ6 programme point on community solidarity networks.

The three proposals are linked by one principle: the panel becomes a tool of the solution if it also makes its own work measurable. The monthly data show the starting point, the target values the direction and pace of progress, and the funding plan what the target will be met from. The EU framework provides money and a yardstick, the Observatory’s study the conditions of coordination, and the World Bank report the reason for the time pressure.

Part IV — Expected effects and risks

Dimension Expected effect Risk
Children Shorter hospital stays, more family placements; development and a stable relationship are ensured during the wait as well The pressure of the target figure may lead to hasty placements if the preparation of foster parents is neglected
Healthcare Freed-up beds and nursing time go to patient care; hospitals receive comparable data Hospital-by-hospital reporting may stigmatise institutions where, because of regional shortages, more children are stuck
Budget ESF+ funding reduces the domestic burden; foster care is cheaper in the longer term than months of hospital care Standby payments are a permanent expense even when a place is temporarily empty; the scheduling of EU calls for proposals may be slow
Public administration The common definition and the monthly data harmonise the records of the guardianship authority, OKFŐ and the National Child Protection Service The capacity of a panel working without remuneration may be insufficient for quarterly progress reports if there is no secretariat behind it

The most important trade-off lies in the target figures of proposal 3.2. A numerical target speeds things up, but if the foster care network does not expand along with it, the system may meet the target at the child’s expense. Examples would be placement with an unprepared foster parent, or ending up in a children’s home instead of a hospital. This is why the direction of placement must also be reported in the 3.1 data series: a fall in hospital numbers is a success only if the children end up in families. The other condition is the panel’s capacity. Without remuneration and with quarterly meetings, monthly data processing works only if OKFŐ and the Directorate General for Social Affairs and Child Protection carry it out with their own staff and the panel evaluates it.

Part V — Measurability and summary

5.1 What is worth tracking? (proposed KPIs)

MIAK proposes tracking the following key performance indicators (KPIs):

  • Publicity: from December 2026, does the hospital-by-hospital data series appear monthly, with a uniform definition and the direction of placement?
  • Headcount: 12 months after the concept’s adoption, is the number of children stuck in hospital below half of the baseline value?
  • Duration: by the end of 2027, is the median number of days between the end of healthcare treatment and placement below 30; by the end of 2028, is there still any child under 3 waiting for more than 90 days?
  • Network: by the end of 2027, does the number of foster care places for babies, including standby places, reach the baseline hospital headcount?

5.2 Summary

MIAK welcomes the fact that the issue of children stuck in hospital has been given an intersectoral panel with fixed deadlines. It asks the panel and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Family to adopt a common definition at the inaugural meeting and to publish hospital-by-hospital data monthly from December. The January concept should set numerical targets and quarterly milestones, and allocate domestic and EU funding to the expansion of the foster care network, with safeguards for the transitional tools. The proposal touches on two of MIAK’s foundational values. One is accountability: the work of a panel that operates without remuneration and has no legislative force can be held to account only through public data and targets committed to in advance. The other is data-drivenness: as long as different figures appear on the number of children depending on the source, the effect of the intervention cannot be assessed either.

Part VI — Reasoning and further sources

6.1 Press framing by spectrum

Left-liberal band. Besides the organisational details, Telex highlighted the panel’s operating conditions: members receive no remuneration and meet quarterly. It also published its own figure, writing about 301 children, together with their geographical concentration. The article also presented the procedural logic of the recently adopted law: the order of birth family, relative, then foster parent or adoption. In the material processed, 444.hu and HVG did not publish a separate article on the decision.

Mainstream public-affairs band. Index and 24.hu carried the MTI news report with almost identical wording, built on the decision’s task list and the list of members. Both quoted the minister’s earlier figure of more than 320. Another Index article framed the amendment of the child protection law from the angle of the political dispute over sex education. This indicates that in public discourse child protection appears primarily as a cultural-political issue, while questions of specialised care are pushed into the background.

Economic band. Portfolio also published MTI material, but put the emphasis in its headline on the 90-day deadline, and highlighted that the panel works on a voluntary basis. The paper indicated that an artificial intelligence assistant had contributed to the preparation of the article.

Conservative band. No article on the decision appeared in the processed material of Magyar Nemzet; materials from Mandiner and Népszava were not in the processed set.

6.2 Facts and data

Item Value Source
Publication of the government decision 26 October 2026, Magyar Közlöny (Monday evening) 24.hu; Telex
Chair of the panel Szilvia Gyurkó, State Secretary for Children’s Rights and Child Protection at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Family Index; Telex; 24.hu
State members Ministry of Education and Children’s Affairs, Ministry of Health, OKFŐ, guardianship department of the Budapest Capital Government Office, Directorate General for Social Affairs and Child Protection, National Child Protection Service, Margit Slachta National Institute for Social Policy Index; 24.hu
Civil members ten invited civil, professional or interest-representation organisations Index; Telex
Operation meets at least quarterly; quorate if more than half of the members are present; members and experts without remuneration or reimbursement of expenses Telex; Portfolio
Deadlines inaugural meeting within 30 days; first concept within 60 days after that Index; 24.hu; Portfolio
Children stuck in hospital (ministerial statement) more than 320, for more than 105 days on average Index; 24.hu; Portfolio
Children stuck in hospital (Telex) 301, mainly in Budapest and the eastern half of the country Telex, 26 October 2026
Children stuck in hospital (September briefing) 358 Telex, 12 September 2026
Adoption of the child protection legislative package 13 October 2026 Telex
Guardianship authority deadline under the law situation assessment and action plan within 8 days at most Telex
ESF+ rule at least 25% of member-state resources against poverty and social exclusion; in the member states most affected by child poverty at least 5% for measures against child poverty, in the others an appropriate amount for implementing the Child Guarantee The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan

The three headcount figures in the table are not necessarily a contradiction: the number changes from day to day, and the sources refer to different points in time, probably with different definitions. This is precisely what justifies proposal 3.1: without a common definition and monthly publication, a decrease cannot be demonstrated reliably either.

6.3 Policy dimensions

  • Social policy (programme points) — reducing child protection case-handling time (SZ7), supporting civil and volunteer networks (SZ6), the indicator-based national action plan (SZ12), tracking EU cohesion funds with outcome indicators (SZ14);
  • Healthcare (programme points) — public data reporting by institution (E3), data linking for prevention (E4); freeing up hospital beds and nursing capacity;
  • Demography (programme points) — regular, linked publication of data on children (DM1).

6.4 Literature in detail

6.4.1 European Commission: The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan

In its chapter on poverty, the action plan starts from the premise that breaking the intergenerational transmission of disadvantage begins with investing in children. The Commission therefore proposed the Council recommendation on the European Child Guarantee, which aims at effective access to basic services for children in need. The document also lays down a financial rule:

“Member States most affected by child poverty should invest at least 5% in measures combating child poverty. All others should equally allocate appropriate amounts to implement the forthcoming Child Guarantee.”

The plan treats numerical targets as a tool for the results orientation of policy, and calls on member states to set their own national targets. In the case of children stuck in hospital this means two things. There is an EU funding framework for expanding the foster care network (3.3), and the concept must also set its own numerical targets (3.2).

📖 Source: European Commission: The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan (COM(2021) 102 final), the chapters on fighting poverty and on EU funding

6.4.2 Eriksen and co-authors: Improving reach and access to health promotion and preventive services for vulnerable children and adolescents

The study compares the experiences of Germany, the Netherlands, France, Portugal and Finland in the care of children in vulnerable situations. According to the authors, the period from pregnancy to the third year after birth is decisive, and separation from parents and a lack of nurturing care are among the risk factors for development. For intersectoral tasks they recommend a strong cooperation structure: groups and bodies made up of representatives of several disciplines that ensure coordination between organisations. Their second recommendation is cross-sector data collection and data sharing. Service planning requires aggregated, anonymised data, and between providers, information on individual children and families must flow. The composition of the Hungarian panel meets the first condition: three ministries, the hospital maintainer, the guardianship authority and civil organisations sit on it. The second condition, shared data, is missing from the decision; proposal 3.1 fills this gap.

📖 Source: Astrid Eriksen, Freia De Bock, Adrienne Alayli, Karin Boode, Béatrice Durvy, Tania Gaspar, Silja Kosola, Sonia Saxena, Ewout van Ginneken: Improving reach and access to health promotion and preventive services for vulnerable children and adolescents — Experiences from five European countries (Policy Brief 67, European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, 2025) (paraphrase)

6.4.3 World Bank: World Development Report 2015: Mind, Society, and Behavior

Chapter 5 of the report deals with early childhood development. It finds that persistent stress and little emotional and cognitive stimulation in the first years can narrow the development of physical and mental abilities in the long term. The authors stress that disadvantaged children less often receive consistent support from a responsive caregiver. In language development only speech addressed directly to the child counts, not speech overheard by chance. In this framework a hospital ward is a particularly unfavourable environment. Staff change, attention is directed at patient care, and the child has no constant adult. Two conclusions follow. Every day by which the hospital stay is shortened counts (3.2). And among the transitional tools, those that provide a constant relationship are valuable, which is why the same volunteer must be assigned to the same child (3.3).

📖 Source: World Bank: World Development Report 2015 — Mind, Society, and Behavior, Chapter 5: Early childhood development (paraphrase)

6.5 International comparison

A permanent coordination body with its own organisation. The Portuguese National Commission for the Promotion of the Rights and Protection of Children and Young People (CNPDPCJ) is among the examples presented by Eriksen and her co-authors (see 6.4.2). It is a legal person governed by public law, with administrative autonomy and its own assets, and it supervises the municipal child protection commissions. The health, education and social ministries take part in it together. By comparison, the Hungarian panel operates without remuneration or its own staff, so monthly data processing must be entrusted to the existing background institutions (Part IV).

Early help in a network. Since 2007 the German Frühe Hilfen (early help) programme has supported families from pregnancy to early childhood through municipal networks, with particular attention to those struggling with psychosocial difficulties. The lesson for the Hungarian case: part of hospital stranding can be prevented if at-risk expectant mothers come into contact with support services before birth.

Data as the basis for decisions. According to the Observatory, the Finnish LAPE programme is an example of how a comprehensive child welfare reform needs measurement tools and cross-sector data infrastructure. This is the international parallel of proposal 3.1.

Social policy

  • SZ6 — Support for community solidarity networks
  • SZ7 — “Dignity-based” social policy
  • SZ12 — National action plan of the European Pillar of Social Rights
  • SZ14 — Cohesion Pillar 2.0 — making full use of the Hungarian allocation

Healthcare

  • E3 — Waiting-list transparency
  • E4 — Prevention data programme

Demography

  • DM1 — Demographic data platform

Proposed new programme point: Children stuck in hospital — monthly public data series by hospital with a common definition, numerical targets for reducing hospital stays, a standby foster care network expanded with EU funding — for the Social policy area.

6.7 List of sources

Press sources (MIAK press monitor, 27 October 2026 — topic 6):

Knowledge-base references (books):

  • 📖 European Commission: The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan (2021)
  • 📖 Astrid Eriksen and co-authors: Improving reach and access to health promotion and preventive services for vulnerable children and adolescents (Policy Brief 67, 2025)
  • 📖 World Bank: World Development Report 2015 — Mind, Society, and Behavior

MIAK internal materials:

  • MIAK policy area: Social policy (programme points; programme point ID: SZ6, SZ7, SZ12, SZ14)
  • MIAK policy area: Healthcare (programme points; programme point ID: E3, E4)
  • MIAK policy area: Demography (programme points; programme point ID: DM1)
  • MIAK press monitor, 27 October 2026 — topic 6, score: 71/100

Generation metadata