Can a doctor dismiss/ choose a doctor??

Yes, I think so. I mean just because he makes good money does not mean that he deserves to be put through $%^&. And if this patient comes in he could aggravate the doctor and he may inadvertently take it out on everyone the rest of the day if it gets to him. It is just not a healthy situation all around.

Mimpi,

A very interesting and thought provoking topic.

I do agree that the doctor has the right to choose his patients. For the reasons that you have explained, most certainly so. The compatibilty of the patient or his family members with the doctor is the difficult one, however I would still go in favour of the doctor. I have seen instances where a patient does not have a say in the matter, and it is the over anxious family members who complicate the issue. Any such abusive or threatning behaviour will most certainly cause a lot of distress to the doctor, he will not be able to focus on the illness, may then make an error and further complicate the case. There are those who might say that this is an ethical issue, but in my opinion the moment the patient or his family members transgress the line of respect and faith in the doctor, there is no sense in the doctor patient relationship continuing. The responsibility of the doctor here would to give a notice or inform the patient/family of his not wanting to treat the case any more and giving the patient/family members a reasonable time to find a suitable replacement.

The doctor also the option of refusing to treat the patient when he is of the opinion that he may not be the best qualified for it and may want to refer it someone else.

I think that a doctor has a right to choose whether to take a patient or not just the same as when we make an appointment we can choose which doctor to see, well we can here in the UK anyway. We don't have to pay but if books are full they can refuse to take additional patients. There is one particular doctor that I don't get on too well with at my surgery so if they give me an appointment with her I will ask if there are any other appointments available. Ellie:D

I think it is a tricky question. I can see situastion where it is really not wise for a doctor to continue seeing someone. I can certainly see situations where the pations no longer feel like seeing the doctor. Here we are free to choose another one twice a year.

I have to say I do not believe that doctors should be able to dismiss a patient. If he does not want a patient aymore he should first find a new doctor that will treat the patient. Some people, like addicts, homeless, difficult psychiatric patienst may soon find themselves all alone with no doctor a all I think. I imagine most doctors will agree on who they'd dismiss. While a patient may love a doctor and another will not like him. And it is the patients that are buying a service. naturally they should be able to take their money elsewhere.

I think theoritcally a Doctor should not refuse a patient who is in dire straits. If a patient has failed to keep up his appointment or not in a position to pay the full fees, he should not be denied the treatment from a Doctor. If the Doctor is not happy with the behaviour of a patient, he has every right to tell him about it or even can scold him on this account, but ultimately he is supposed to attend the patient. But I find, in today's materialistic world, even some Doctors have become unsympathatic and stone heart. They wish to see the patients at their own convenience and treat some patients very shabbily. Perhaps they feel that Doctors (read good Doctors) are less than the number of (poor) patients, so if they send one patient back to home or refuse to see him, another will follow, with the result the patients who do not have resources (either monetary or otherwise) always face the ignomity of ill-treatment and suffer endlessly.
Very Good discussion!!

Hi mimpi,
Personally I think, such a kind of behaviour is not suitable for medical profession. Though you have clearly mentioned the different situations where doctors obviously will not do this, but in general also, I think doctors should not do this. In emergency, we look at doctors as God, they are light of hope, they can changes tears into smiles.......such a divine and holy profession, will loose its respect if doctors will refuse patients, no matter what may be the reason. Beside I have not heard any such case........Have you heard about something like this.........Have a nice day mimpi dear.......

We are in the UK, but the same applies to us.I think if the doctor has been abused by a patient,or the patient doesnt turn u for appointments then yes thats fair enough that they may get turned away by that doctor.But otherwise the doctor should not be allowed to choose his patients,that would be discriminative,and if he were to be selctive then it could be that he would end up with someting like a private practise.Like every job there is the rough and the smooth and the doctors have to appreciaite that they will get both.I have found lately that the doctors visits in this country are becoming sometimes very pointless,you are pushed from pillar to post,because they may not want to,or dont want to try to find out the problem.Often I will go to the pharmacy and ask there for something that they think is suitable for the ailment.

A doctor has a right to choose his patients, however, this will depend on the circumstance:

1. Once a doctor has accepted a case or a patient he cnnot leave the patient or
case until: the patient dies, the patient gets well or until the patient
dismisses him or gives his consent to be treated by another doctor

2. similarly a doctor cannot refuse an emergency case if he is capable of treating
this patient unles of course he himself will be in danger if he treats the
patient

Doctors have rights too but because of the nature of their profession and vocation there are some circumstances wherein doctors are obligated to render their services for the good of others.

Mimpi, I think a doctor should be able to refuse service to a patient if they have any reason they don't want that person as a patient. As well as the reasons you have given, there may be a personality clash that prevents the doctor from being unbiased, the patient could possibly be someone the doctor knows socially and doesn't like or it could even be a patient that has a romantic fixation on the doctor that makes the doctor feel uncomfortable. In the latter case, if the doctor refused the patient's advances, the patient could then make untrue claims out of spite. They should not have to take on any patient that makes them feel uncomfortable in any way.

I think the doctor should only have the right to refuse to treat a patient if there is a fundamental reason for the doctor to not want contact with that patient again, e.g. if the patient has been abusive or violent or threatening to the doctor. I understand some people can be a bit abusive if they are unwell but I am talking about when patients violently demand a doctor's note and the doctor is fully aware that a doctor's note is not necessary or the patient is demanding drugs which they do not need. In the UK there are signs in surgeries saying that abusive or violent patients will be excluded from the surgery. And I do agree with it. Why should the doctors or nurses or reception staff have to put up with violence in their workplace? The rest of us are not expected to put up with it so why should medical staff? After all, they are supposed to be there to help, not take abuse.

On the other hand if a doctor does not like a patient because of their personality or religion or race, etc, that is not a feasible reason to not treat them!