Should patients be allowed to discriminate?

[Patriarch]

I've recently had the pleasant experience of spending a night in the local accident and emergency department strapped to a spinal board following a car crash. While I languished there waiting for the painfully slow NHS system to plod through my case I found some entertainment in eavesdroppinj on the other conversations going on in the department. In between the nurses gossiping about their colleagues in other departments or the docs making offensive comments about patients in their care I heard a number of patients making requests to see doctors and nurses of specific genders, ethnicities and sexualities. On all of these occasions the A+E team grudgingly relented and accommodated the requests.

This got me thinking (as best I could with the discomfort of the board and no chance of a drink of water) about the right or wrong of this. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would say that these requests are nothing but [insert discriminatory factor]-ism but I think healthcare is one area I'm which this behaviour should be tolerated. To punish someones intolerance by denying them healthcare on this basis isn't acceptable to me. They're in a position of vulnerability and fear and every effort should be taken by the 'caring' professions to make the patient comfortable and relaxed while they recuperate,

Whatsp are your thoughts though? Should patients be able to discriminate in their choice of healthcare professionals?

[Herador]

Patients should have the ability to decide who their health care provider is, if that decision is reached based on discrimination, that's their business.

[Wind in the Willows]

No, it doesn't matter what sexuality, ethnicity or gender the health provider is. Nobody should be picky when it comes to healthcare, they are lucky they are even being treated. In some countries, it would cost them.

[Utceforp]

Normally I would be against this, but for purely pragmatic reasons, it probably wouldn't be a good idea to force something on a patient that they're obviously strongly against, depending on the situation. For non-emergencies, they should not be allowed to discriminate, but in emergencies where it is easy and feasible to get the doctor they wish to be treated by, I would let them discriminate. You don't want someone who's at risk of going into shock any unnecessary stress, for example.

[Geilinor]

No, it doesn't matter what sexuality, ethnicity or gender the health provider is. Nobody should be picky when it comes to healthcare, they are lucky they are even being treated. In some countries, it would cost them.

What if it doesn't cost you anything? In a universal healthcare system, all providers should cost roughly the same.

[Wind in the Willows]

No, it doesn't matter what sexuality, ethnicity or gender the health provider is. Nobody should be picky when it comes to healthcare, they are lucky they are even being treated. In some countries, it would cost them.

What if it doesn't cost you anything? In a universal healthcare system, all providers should cost roughly the same.

My point is that they should not be picky about who their doctor or nurses are, especially when it comes to things like their gender, sexuality or ethnicity.

[Utceforp]

What if it doesn't cost you anything? In a universal healthcare system, all providers should cost roughly the same.

My point is that they should not be picky about who their doctor or nurses are, especially when it comes to things like their gender, sexuality or ethnicity.

If it's an emergency, they should be allowed to be picky as long as getting the doctor that they want causes less problems than arguing with them.

[Patriarch]

What if it doesn't cost you anything? In a universal healthcare system, all providers should cost roughly the same.

My point is that they should not be picky about who their doctor or nurses are, especially when it comes to things like their gender, sexuality or ethnicity.

If they are though how should it be handled?

[Geilinor]

What if it doesn't cost you anything? In a universal healthcare system, all providers should cost roughly the same.

My point is that they should not be picky about who their doctor or nurses are, especially when it comes to things like their gender, sexuality or ethnicity.

I don't like discrimination based on gender, sexuality, or ethnicity, but it could make the patient more likely to cooperate with treatment.

[Ostroeuropa]

What if it doesn't cost you anything? In a universal healthcare system, all providers should cost roughly the same.

My point is that they should not be picky about who their doctor or nurses are, especially when it comes to things like their gender, sexuality or ethnicity.

Suppose that say, in the UK, they demand an English doctor because "Your accent is too thick."

[Mike the Progressive]

Patients should have the ability to decide who their health care provider is, if that decision is reached based on discrimination, that's their business.

Yup.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

Only if it is something reasonable.

When I was a toddler, in my last years of life of my grandfather, he had to stop smoking and my grandma stopped too out of empathy. The only problem is that her weight had a sudden surge and she could barely take a 100m walk without losing her breath.

She then refused to be treated by an endocrinologist recommended to treat her obesity caused by her quitting smoking who was obese himself and was smoking in his clinic while he attended her, with thousands of interruptions by the phone before. She then went out while they screamed "it's indeed here! it's here!" while she mumbled going home.

At coming home she started smoking again after a 6 months quit and lost all the excess 15kg (she's really short, it made a significant difference) in another 2.

Now I don't have anything against smokers as both my mom and my grandma are and I'm obese myself, but if the doctor seemed more presentable, maybe he would put his effort into treating the obesity whilst not having my grandmother going back to smoking.

[Priory Academy USSR]

My point is that they should not be picky about who their doctor or nurses are, especially when it comes to things like their gender, sexuality or ethnicity.

Suppose that say, in the UK, they demand an English doctor because "Your accent is too thick."

Then there should be an English speaking course for doctors and other medical professionals, so that doesn't impede on their ability to treat patients.

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

I can think of reasonable and unreasonable grounds for patients to discriminate against protected classes. If I deem it unreasonable i'd block their request in any dept I worked in. I'm not to blame if their poor decisions harm them and I have no obligation to enable bad behaviour.

[Ostroeuropa]

Suppose that say, in the UK, they demand an English doctor because "Your accent is too thick."

Then there should be an English speaking course for doctors and other medical professionals, so that doesn't impede on their ability to treat patients.

They can speak English.
They just can't speak a British Accent.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

My point is that they should not be picky about who their doctor or nurses are, especially when it comes to things like their gender, sexuality or ethnicity.

Suppose that say, in the UK, they demand an English doctor because "Your accent is too thick."

But all Anglophone accents are too thick. The vowels are never clearly intuitive.

They can take the hard time of expecting the other person to explain things slowly and calmly to them.

[Wind in the Willows]

My point is that they should not be picky about who their doctor or nurses are, especially when it comes to things like their gender, sexuality or ethnicity.

Suppose that say, in the UK, they demand an English doctor because "Your accent is too thick."

Every foreigner wanting to become a doctor should have to sit a course on how to talk English properly, so it doesn't impede their ability to treat patients.

[Liriena]

I'm actually kinda torn on this.

On the one hand, it's pretty much been a given, even in universal health care systems, that patients can choose whether they are to be treated or not, and that this extends to who they are to be treated by.

On the other hand, refusing to have a certain medical professional treat you because of that professional's gender, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation would be beyond stupid.

Should patients be allowed to discriminate? I would say yes, within reason.

Should a patient choose to discriminate professionals, and should said patient's recovery suffer for it, however, said patient should lose the right to claim any sort of responsibility on the part of the discriminated professional.

[Orham]

I think healthcare is one area I'm which this behaviour should be tolerated. To punish someones intolerance by denying them healthcare on this basis isn't acceptable to me. They're in a position of vulnerability and fear and every effort should be taken by the 'caring' professions to make the patient comfortable and relaxed while they recuperate,

Whatsp are your thoughts though? Should patients be able to discriminate in their choice of healthcare professionals?

I think you've more or less got the right of it. But the degree to which I think an institution or organization ought to accommodate patients' requests is subjective. For instance, if a racist emergency patient insists that he won't be seen by a black nurse, tough shit. If a woman wants to be seen by a female gynecologist, however, that's perfectly reasonable and the institution should accommodate.

[-Caliente]

No, it doesn't matter what sexuality, ethnicity or gender the health provider is. Nobody should be picky when it comes to healthcare, they are lucky they are even being treated. In some countries, it would cost them.

If I don't want a black man to treat me, I should be able to pick a different doctor. It's not about luck, or privilege-- it's about personal preference. Nobody should just feel lucky just being treated because doctor's are WRONG more often than not, when diagnosing illnesses and what not. Getting a second opinion is important and if you value an Asian doctor's advice over an Indian doctor's, there shouldn't be an issue.

[Jacobios]

For non-emergencies, they should not be allowed to discriminate, but in emergencies where it is easy and feasible to get the doctor they wish to be treated by, I would let them discriminate. You don't want someone who's at risk of going into shock any unnecessary stress, for example.

In an emergency I don't think you would be picky about who treats you, just that you want to get better as quick as possible.

[Utceforp]

For non-emergencies, they should not be allowed to discriminate, but in emergencies where it is easy and feasible to get the doctor they wish to be treated by, I would let them discriminate. You don't want someone who's at risk of going into shock any unnecessary stress, for example.

In an emergency I don't think you would be picky about who treats you, just that you want to get better as quick as possible.

That's a good point. But in the unlikely scenario that the man having a heart attack wants to have a white doctor, it might be a good idea to focus more on treating him than arguing with him.

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

In an emergency I don't think you would be picky about who treats you, just that you want to get better as quick as possible.

That's a good point. But in the unlikely scenario that the man having a heart attack wants to have a white doctor, it might be a good idea to focus more on treating him than arguing with him.

Assuming he has capacity, he can fuck off. Its up to him whether he wants to risk morbidity and mortality to continue his bigotry. It's not up to me to enable it.

[Jacobios]

In an emergency I don't think you would be picky about who treats you, just that you want to get better as quick as possible.

That's a good point. But in the unlikely scenario that the man having a heart attack wants to have a white doctor, it might be a good idea to focus more on treating him than arguing with him.

Most British people couldn't give a toss who is treating them, they should be thankful that their treatment is 'free'. When a service is already stretched people cannot afford to be picking and choosing.

[Orham]

If I don't want a black man to treat me, I should be able to pick a different doctor. It's not about luck, or privilege-- it's about personal preference.

As I said before: tough shit. There's no good reason to accommodate this.

Nobody should just feel lucky just being treated because doctor's are WRONG more often than not, when diagnosing illnesses and what not.

What is this madness? Diagnosis is a process of elimination by its very nature. If you expect a doctor to get the correct diagnosis on the first shot and to never need a second opinion, you're just being unreasonable.

Getting a second opinion is important and if you value an Asian doctor's advice over an Indian doctor's, there shouldn't be an issue.

...no, there's definitely an issue. You're insisting that a medical institution be compelled to make unreasonable accommodations for racist patients.