Are their any grounds when a doctor can refuse to treat a patient? Speaking hypothetically, what if no other doctor was capable of treating this patient, perhaps he requires a rare form of surgery that nobody else can perform, should the doctor be morally obligated to help then? To complicate matters, what if the patient and the doctor had a past history together, as in the case of the Rape of Dr Willis. Is the doctor still morally required to give help?
Most of us appreciate the value of human life and hold it the upmost regard. To this end, does this therefore mean there is no moral difference between a health professional's duty to help somebody involved in, say, a road accident and somebody that isn't contractually a medical practioner but is equally competant and has all the necessary medical skills? For clarity's sake, the health professional in question wasn't called to the scene but was off duty and just happened to be passing by at the time of the accident.
2006-08-29 23:57:47 · 9 answers · asked by MrSandman 5 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Medicine
The patient is not a threat to the doctor now.
2006-08-30 00:03:48 · update #1
The doctor has the power to intervene and change the current state of affairs, that is to survive the patient's life, for only he can, but if he choses not to, and the patient dies, is he responsible for the patients death?
2006-08-30 00:05:42 · update #2
Ignore legal issues.
2006-08-30 00:37:40 · update #3
No,it would be unethical to do so
(but exceptions can be made sometimes,rarely)
2006-08-30 00:04:44 · answer #1 · answered by LamboMan 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't understand everything you've put forth here, but I can tell you sometimes they are allowed to refuse to help if the patient is beyond their abilities, has too many problems (too much liability), isn't losing weight fast enough, hasn't fixed a home situation, etc. I don't think that's right either, especially if the person has been following the doctor's instructions or doesn't have the money to do all the things he's asked.
"Most of us appreciate the value of human life and hold it the upmost regard."
I agree with this and believe doctors should not be able to turn anyone away at all, anyone who has taken the time to seek treatment must want to change. Otherwise they'd still be sitting at home/going to school or work sick or hurting.
I think there is a moral duty for a skilled person to help someone in a road accident...unless perhaps there is something you don't know about him. Maybe he was drunk and didn't want to hurt the injured party more, maybe he takes drugs. (A good deal of them do these days...and we let them treat us....) What is more likely is he was a cold man worried only about money and possibility for liabilities.
The rape thing confused me and made me wonder if that's why he didn't help, if he committed such an act...why would he? He is a monster. I'm sorry.
2006-08-30 07:09:21 · answer #2 · answered by *babydoll* 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fellow human beings are not a sub creation of human mind like all scientific and technological innovations but are that of primary natural creation having a sentient life with unique capabilities of intellect and intelligence as special gifts. Under the Hippocratic oath every medical practitioner has the professed obligation to preserve life of fellow human beings as a primary code of moral conduct when sought by a patient. Even if a patient and doctor have a common history it only relates to personal transactions but not basic life as such which is continuing to the required occasion. Hence the doctor has to attend to patient's life first before settling personal scores judiciously later. By similar reasoning any person with sufficient medical skills acquired by experience but not recognized authoritatively can act under accidental emergencies to preseve life before professional aid comes to rescue. After all morality is a virtue of mind and life is the grace of god which must be preserved humbly free from personal prejudice and accidental termination.
2006-08-30 08:46:33 · answer #3 · answered by sastry m 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, a doctor can refuse to treat a patient if he wants to.Regarding the road accident case no doctor would disclose he is one,as there are chances of getting sued
Regarding helping an accident victim,though it depends from person to person.I heard in France u can get jailed if u see an accident and u didn't help the victims if there is no help.
2006-08-30 10:50:27 · answer #4 · answered by vema 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, doctors are under no obligation to treat people, PERIOD. The only circumstances where medical treatment cannot be denied is in the hospital emergency room. Even then, only life saving treatment is mandatory--anything else, even preventative surgery, is not covered. Why should doctors be forced to treat people who refuse to pay? The costs for everyone else would go up, not to mention the number of people who would just get medical treatmtent without paying when they otherwise would. If it's free, who is going to pay? Give me a break!
2006-08-30 07:03:52 · answer #5 · answered by surfinthedesert 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I can't say for sure, but under certain grounds I would imagine that it is OK, for example, if the patient is a threat to the life or safety of the doctor.
2006-08-30 07:01:55 · answer #6 · answered by Paul H 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Depends what country you live in and yes they have the right to not see anyone ... they have a code of ethics they follow but they can turn away anyone they want...
2006-08-30 08:01:36 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The answer to this depends upon which country you live in.
Medical ethics and the rule of law are not always in tandem.
2006-08-30 07:32:03 · answer #8 · answered by Rosie S 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well i wouldn't want a heart surgeon to perform neurosurgery
2006-08-30 07:04:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋