NATION

PASSWORD

Should patients be allowed to discriminate?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Should patients be able to discriminate?

Yes
34
39%
No
36
41%
Maybe
17
20%
 
Total votes : 87

User avatar
Utceforp
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10285
Founded: Apr 10, 2012
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Utceforp » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:04 pm

Jacobios wrote:
Utceforp wrote: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.

Key words being "they should be". In an ideal world people wouldn't be xenophobic at all, and we should encourage people to be more accepting. And as I said earlier, if it's harder to get another doctor than it is to continue arguing with them, then ignore their requests. However, if getting another doctor is easier, just go with what they're saying. You don't want to cause someone who could go into shock unnecessary stress.
Last edited by Utceforp on Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Signatures are so 2014.

User avatar
Utceforp
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10285
Founded: Apr 10, 2012
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Utceforp » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:07 pm

-Caliente wrote:
Wind in the Willows wrote: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.

1. If I don't want a black man to treat me, I should be able to pick a different doctor. 2. It's not about luck, or privilege-- it's about personal preference. Nobody should just feel lucky just being treated 3. because doctor's are WRONG more often than not, when diagnosing illnesses and what not. 4. 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.

1. Why would you not want a black person to treat you?

2. See above. Why would you prefer someone of a certain race?

3. Source this bullshit.

4. Being a certain ethnicity doesn't automatically make you a better doctor than someone of another ethnicity.
Signatures are so 2014.

User avatar
Jacobios
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 64
Founded: Apr 13, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Jacobios » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:10 pm

We shouldn't be accommodating for people's racist or xenophobic views. The United Kingdom is one of the most diverse cultures in the world and patients should be aware that that cultural diversity is reflected in all areas of society, hospitals included. If we allow people to be choosing over racist views then it will make the problem worse. We should be moving toward inclusion not exclusion.
Jacob Jones
Prime Minister of Jacobios

User avatar
Utceforp
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10285
Founded: Apr 10, 2012
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Utceforp » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:12 pm

Jacobios wrote:We shouldn't be accommodating for people's racist or xenophobic views.

We should be if it not doing so could harm the patient's health.
Signatures are so 2014.

User avatar
The Liberated Territories
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11831
Founded: Dec 03, 2013
Capitalizt

Postby The Liberated Territories » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:14 pm

Of course. For them not to is silly. But if you refuse treatment by someone of another race and die, then it is your own fault. No tears will be shed.
"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
—Robert Heinlein

a libertarian, which means i want poor babies to die or smth

User avatar
Utceforp
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10285
Founded: Apr 10, 2012
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Utceforp » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:16 pm

The Liberated Territories wrote:Of course. For them not to is silly. But if you refuse treatment by someone of another race and die, then it is your own fault. No tears will be shed.

If someone refuses treatment for arbitrary reasons such as race, treatment should be forced on them. Letting somebody die is bad no matter how backwards, xenophobic or otherwise idiotic their views are.
Signatures are so 2014.

User avatar
Fionnuala_Saoirse
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5242
Founded: Nov 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Fionnuala_Saoirse » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:19 pm

Utceforp wrote:
The Liberated Territories wrote:Of course. For them not to is silly. But if you refuse treatment by someone of another race and die, then it is your own fault. No tears will be shed.

If someone refuses treatment for arbitrary reasons such as race, treatment should be forced on them. Letting somebody die is bad no matter how backwards, xenophobic or otherwise idiotic their views are.


Patient autonomy is kind of an important medical ethical principle.
Stupid Telegrams Received :

- "Isn't your name the name of the female Branch of the IRA" -- Benian Republic

User avatar
The Liberated Territories
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11831
Founded: Dec 03, 2013
Capitalizt

Postby The Liberated Territories » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:21 pm

Utceforp wrote:
The Liberated Territories wrote:Of course. For them not to is silly. But if you refuse treatment by someone of another race and die, then it is your own fault. No tears will be shed.

If someone refuses treatment for arbitrary reasons such as race, treatment should be forced on them. Letting somebody die is bad no matter how backwards, xenophobic or otherwise idiotic their views are.


Tell me: why should my tax money go to keeping racists alive? I see no reason to give them treatment if they refuse it out of their narrow-mindedness.

This too:

Patient autonomy is kind of an important medical ethical principle.
Last edited by The Liberated Territories on Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
—Robert Heinlein

a libertarian, which means i want poor babies to die or smth

User avatar
Osterlais
Envoy
 
Posts: 291
Founded: Dec 30, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Osterlais » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:22 pm

Utceforp wrote:1. Why would you not want a black person to treat you?

2. See above. Why would you prefer someone of a certain race?

4. Being a certain ethnicity doesn't automatically make you a better doctor than someone of another ethnicity.


here are some hypothetical answers:

1. Perhaps a black person beat the patient and doesn't trust them? Or more likely, a black person doesn't trust or feel comfortable with white people, because of past experiences with racism. I did hear a story of a solider who had been in Iraq and afterwards while going to University, he basically had a phobia of Arabs and Muslims, he ended up joining the Muslim student group, but perhaps when sick, it is not the time for people to face their phobias or prejudice.


4. Being of a certain culture (especially the same culture as a patient) might give someone better bedside manner, or just make a person feel at home.

I think that medical staff have a duty to take care of people, and to make reasonable accommodation.

User avatar
Jacobios
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 64
Founded: Apr 13, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Jacobios » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:27 pm

Utceforp wrote:
Jacobios wrote:We shouldn't be accommodating for people's racist or xenophobic views.

We should be if it not doing so could harm the patient's health.

I'm sure by not being treated by a doctor immediately is far worse for a patient than them spouting their racist views.

Allowing patients to discriminate will create a divide; those who willing accept anyone and those who have racist views and will only accept treatment from their ideal. It is not efficient for the NHS to accommodate for these views when the service is already at capacity and time is of the essence. Essentially by allowing this we will be saying if you don't conform to these qualities then we can't employ you. I would not want to be the staff nurse that told an Asian doctor, "Sorry he doesn't want you because you're a different colour to him."
Jacob Jones
Prime Minister of Jacobios

User avatar
Utceforp
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10285
Founded: Apr 10, 2012
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Utceforp » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:28 pm

Fionnuala_Saoirse wrote:
Utceforp wrote:If someone refuses treatment for arbitrary reasons such as race, treatment should be forced on them. Letting somebody die is bad no matter how backwards, xenophobic or otherwise idiotic their views are.


Patient autonomy is kind of an important medical ethical principle.

I did some quick reading into the concept, and applied my now-faded knowledge from first aid training. From what I understand, a patient who is considered unable to give informed consent (e.g. a child, someone with a severe mental illness, someone unconscious, et cetera) can be treated if another, sound-minded person gives consent. I think denying treatment based on the race of your doctor can be considered evidence of not being able to give informed consent.
Signatures are so 2014.

User avatar
Densaner
Minister
 
Posts: 2729
Founded: Jul 19, 2005
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Densaner » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:29 pm

No. Patient choice is a myth. If you're a patient and you don't like it then get up off the trolley and go to a private hospital. The NHS isn't there to cater for your every whim.

User avatar
Fionnuala_Saoirse
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5242
Founded: Nov 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Fionnuala_Saoirse » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:30 pm

Utceforp wrote:
Fionnuala_Saoirse wrote:
Patient autonomy is kind of an important medical ethical principle.

I did some quick reading into the concept, and applied my now-faded knowledge from first aid training. From what I understand, a patient who is considered unable to give informed consent (e.g. a child, someone with a severe mental illness, someone unconscious, et cetera) can be treated if another, sound-minded person gives consent. I think denying treatment based on the race of your doctor can be considered evidence of not being able to give informed consent.


Then you really need to read into the concept of informed consent and capacity because you clearly don't have a clue
Stupid Telegrams Received :

- "Isn't your name the name of the female Branch of the IRA" -- Benian Republic

User avatar
Utceforp
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10285
Founded: Apr 10, 2012
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Utceforp » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:31 pm

Jacobios wrote:
Utceforp wrote:We should be if it not doing so could harm the patient's health.

I'm sure by not being treated by a doctor immediately is far worse for a patient than them spouting their racist views.

That's a good point, but if there's another doctor nearby and immediately available it doesn't apply.
Jacobios wrote:I would not want to be the staff nurse that told an Asian doctor, "Sorry he doesn't want you because you're a different colour to him."

Racism is bad. Really, really bad. But don't you think that offending someone in exchange for preserving the health of someone else, no matter how racist or generally idiotic the latter person is, is a good trade-offÉ
Signatures are so 2014.

User avatar
Utceforp
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10285
Founded: Apr 10, 2012
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Utceforp » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:32 pm

Fionnuala_Saoirse wrote:
Utceforp wrote:I did some quick reading into the concept, and applied my now-faded knowledge from first aid training. From what I understand, a patient who is considered unable to give informed consent (e.g. a child, someone with a severe mental illness, someone unconscious, et cetera) can be treated if another, sound-minded person gives consent. I think denying treatment based on the race of your doctor can be considered evidence of not being able to give informed consent.


Then you really need to read into the concept of informed consent and capacity because you clearly don't have a clue

They're not capable of making good decisions if those decisions are based on racism.
Signatures are so 2014.

User avatar
Hgvar
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 106
Founded: Feb 27, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Hgvar » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:34 pm

Yes. I don't want a gay doctor fixing me up, it'd be weird.
The meaning of peace is opposition to socialism. -Jesus Christ
People will believe anything in a quote on the Internet.-Charlemagne




Be a (insert gender here) and talk to me instead of running off to your moddy, tell me to shut up if i insult you, and learn to take 90%of what i say( jokes). Got it?

User avatar
Fionnuala_Saoirse
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5242
Founded: Nov 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Fionnuala_Saoirse » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:34 pm

Utceforp wrote:
Fionnuala_Saoirse wrote:
Then you really need to read into the concept of informed consent and capacity because you clearly don't have a clue

They're not capable of making good decisions if those decisions are based on racism.


Capacity has nothing to do with how good or bad the decision made is. Its related to the ability to take in, retain, weigh up and communicate information. Bigotry doesn't inhibit those.

Please for your own legal safety never try first aid for reals.
Stupid Telegrams Received :

- "Isn't your name the name of the female Branch of the IRA" -- Benian Republic

User avatar
Rationallia
Attaché
 
Posts: 80
Founded: Aug 18, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Rationallia » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:35 pm

Discriminating in this case on the basis of gender, age, race, etc. shouldn't be permitted. Chances are the patients opinion , if they were to go as far as requesting a doctor of a certain description, is built upon stereotypes and ignorance (see racism).

If they were requesting a different healthcare service provider (doctor, nurse, etc.) because they experienced or received evidence that they, on a personal level, are unable to fully perform their job to the standard required, then that is acceptable.

Additionally, the above assumes that the patient is paying for the service. If they are receiving medical care for free, then maybe instead of being picky and choosy, then can be thankful that they are actually receiving care for nothing (excluding taxes).

User avatar
Rationallia
Attaché
 
Posts: 80
Founded: Aug 18, 2011
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Rationallia » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:36 pm

Hgvar wrote:Yes. I don't want a gay doctor fixing me up, it'd be weird.


Why would you even know that the doctor is gay? That kind of thing shouldn't come up in a hospital environment.

User avatar
Jacobios
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 64
Founded: Apr 13, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Jacobios » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:38 pm

Utceforp wrote:
Fionnuala_Saoirse wrote:
Patient autonomy is kind of an important medical ethical principle.

From what I understand, a patient who is considered unable to give informed consent (e.g. a child, someone with a severe mental illness, someone unconscious, et cetera) can be treated if another, sound-minded person gives consent. I think denying treatment based on the race of your doctor can be considered evidence of not being able to give informed consent.

The difference between a child with a severe mental illness and someone with racist views is that one is a mental incapacity and the other is a discriminative view.

Utceforp wrote:
Jacobios wrote:I'm sure by not being treated by a doctor immediately is far worse for a patient than them spouting their racist views.

That's a good point, but if there's another doctor nearby and immediately available it doesn't apply.
Jacobios wrote:I would not want to be the staff nurse that told an Asian doctor, "Sorry he doesn't want you because you're a different colour to him."

Racism is bad. Really, really bad. But don't you think that offending someone in exchange for preserving the health of someone else, no matter how racist or generally idiotic the latter person is, is a good trade-offÉ

The Declaration of Geneva states that patients should be treated equally, start catering for people's bigotry views and this principle comes into violation.
Jacob Jones
Prime Minister of Jacobios

User avatar
The Liberated Territories
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11831
Founded: Dec 03, 2013
Capitalizt

Postby The Liberated Territories » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:40 pm

Rationallia wrote:
Hgvar wrote:Yes. I don't want a gay doctor fixing me up, it'd be weird.


Why would you even know that the doctor is gay? That kind of thing shouldn't come up in a hospital environment.


It could. Genital surgery. *nods*
"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
—Robert Heinlein

a libertarian, which means i want poor babies to die or smth

User avatar
Jacobios
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 64
Founded: Apr 13, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Jacobios » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:45 pm

The Liberated Territories wrote:
Rationallia wrote:Why would you even know that the doctor is gay? That kind of thing shouldn't come up in a hospital environment.


It could. Genital surgery. *nods*

Your implication that all gay doctors are somehow attracted to their patients is wrong. Sexuality or any other factor such as race, gender etc. does not effect your performance ability in healthcare.
Jacob Jones
Prime Minister of Jacobios

User avatar
Geilinor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41328
Founded: Feb 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Geilinor » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:46 pm

The Liberated Territories wrote:
Rationallia wrote:
Why would you even know that the doctor is gay? That kind of thing shouldn't come up in a hospital environment.


It could. Genital surgery. *nods*

Genital surgery is rare.
Member of the Free Democratic Party. Not left. Not right. Forward.
Economic Left/Right: -1.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.41

User avatar
The Liberated Territories
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 11831
Founded: Dec 03, 2013
Capitalizt

Postby The Liberated Territories » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:48 pm

Jacobios wrote:
The Liberated Territories wrote:
It could. Genital surgery. *nods*

Your implication that all gay doctors are somehow attracted to their patients is wrong. Sexuality or any other factor such as race, gender etc. does not effect your performance ability in healthcare.


What does performance has to do anything?
"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
—Robert Heinlein

a libertarian, which means i want poor babies to die or smth

User avatar
Fionnuala_Saoirse
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5242
Founded: Nov 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Fionnuala_Saoirse » Sat Mar 01, 2014 4:50 pm

Geilinor wrote:
The Liberated Territories wrote:
It could. Genital surgery. *nods*

Genital surgery is rare.


What the fuck are you on about?
Stupid Telegrams Received :

- "Isn't your name the name of the female Branch of the IRA" -- Benian Republic

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Abserdia, Aureumterra III, Bienenhalde, Cekoviu, Common Territories, Corrian, Dumb Ideologies, Esternial, Gandhian India, Google Adsense [Bot], Hirota, Ifreann, Kingdom of Lau, Kohr, Kowani, Liriena, Maineiacs, Navich, Nolo gap, Norastan, Ramalia Shanatopian, Rathalas, Rusozak, San Lumen, Sayville Founder, Shrillland, SimTropican, Somerania, Svikaria, Technoscience Leftwing, The Black Forrest, The Greater Ohio Valley, The North America Union, The Rich Port, The Unified Missourtama States, Tyranis21, Vassenor, Washington Resistance Army

Advertisement

Remove ads