This is a very interesting question.
Talk about my experience as an answer to this question.
I've seen more than 10 doctors as a patient; I've had one so-called rash withdrawal. First of all I paid 8 dollars for a registered office visit before this doctor would provide me with medical care. This doctor looked at the pictures of my MRI **** vibrations and was about to prescribe me $400 in medication before he could even tell me what the cause of my condition was. I became skeptical of this doctor and I said that that old people's money doesn't come from the tide of the sea. Because of this statement, I had a confrontation with this doctor.
Then the doctor took the initiative and said, "Give me back my rash.
This is the first time I know that there is such a thing as a refund, and then the doctor returned the $8 consultation fee to me through the formalities.
This is even the doctor refused to serve me, through my case, first I do not believe in this doctor, and then this doctor also lazy to care about me, the way to return the rash refused me to continue to serve. So, do doctors have the right to refuse us patients?
The answer is of course, my experience is not a living example? It was this doctor who rejected me. The doctor's right to refuse really doesn't need to be expressed with the mouth, using other words and means to achieve the purpose of refusal, as well as refusal.
It depends. It's not a good idea to refuse to see a doctor in general. The special circumstances of the refusal to diagnose, and will not trigger public opinion whiplash.
One year, a middle-aged woman follow-up, once in the clinic, asked the doctor, why hide their diagnosis of advanced liver cancer? The doctor was confused on the spot, in the past many visits to the examination, the results of the examination data did not find the basis of liver cancer ah. The first thing you need to do is to ask the woman to tell you that she has no idea what she is doing.
The patient replied that she went to the best hospital in the provincial capital for examination, and people said that it was too late for her... You missed the diagnosis here, delayed my condition, and dragged me to the late stage without the rule of law.
The doctor asked the patient to take out the diagnostic report of the provincial hospital.
The patient repeatedly emphasized that it was the provincial hospital doctors who said that it was too late to give treatment.
The doctor and patient began to argue. Finally, the patient asked the doctor to issue a certificate of diagnosis of liver cancer, promising not to pester the doctor again.
The doctor emphasized, asked to see the results of the provincial hospital. Otherwise refused to open the disease diagnosis certificate. The conflict escalated!
The Defense Section and security personnel arrived to coordinate.
The woman patient suddenly took out a kitchen knife from her bag and was immediately stopped.
A discussion, the so-called come late, is the patient to the hospital time to come late, not the disease deterioration of the clinic late!
Stopped female patients still insisted that the doctor to see her to prescribe medication, by the outpatient doctor refused to diagnose.
As a doctor who has been practicing surgery for more than 30 years, I think this period needs to be viewed from several angles. One is what are the rights of the doctor's profession and practice? Two, what are the basic rights of patients? Three, does a doctor have the right to refuse to see a patient?
As we all know, to become a legitimate doctor, at the very least, you must have a physician's qualification certificate and a doctor's license, the qualification certificate is that you have the qualification to become a doctor after learning, the state recognizes that you have a certain ability to receive patients to provide patients with the prescribed scope of medical care; the license is to have the qualification after the confirmation of the post, the provisions of the scope of your practice, place of practice, etc., such as surgery, A certain hospital.
We note that there is a very important issue and element here, which is the scope of practice. A doctor even a general practitioner, it is not possible to make a judgment on all diseases and guide the use of medication and other treatments, in order to regulate the practice of doctors, the state strictly required doctors must be engaged in the place of practice approved by the recognized scope of practice, in layman's terms, is a neurologist engaged in neurosurgery diagnosis and treatment of work is not enough professional ability, the second is not permitted by law, beyond the scope of the clinic The behavior is defined as "illegal practice of medicine".
That is to say, the doctor's right is in the state and the administrative department of the prescribed place of practice to engage in the recognition of the approved scope of practice of the disease diagnosis and treatment work.
This is relatively easy to understand, the patient into the hospital, of course, is to see a doctor. The patient through payment, to the hospital to buy doctors services (including medical personnel, medical technology personnel and other services, including diagnosis and treatment, etc.), so the patient has the right to ask the doctor for their diagnosis and treatment.
But there are several prerequisites: First, the patient pays to the hospital, that is, with the purchase of services; Second, the doctor's treatment within the scope of, for example, the patient ran to the men's request for a doctor to see a cold, the doctor refused, the patient that the doctor refused to accept the diagnosis, which is unreasonable request; Third, a reasonable demand, medical is a rigorous science, medicine has the relative specificity of medicine, the patient must be cured. cure, any doctor will not promise.
From the physician's law as well as the ethical level, doctors should not refuse to receive patients.
There are some special cases, however, that need to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
One is beyond the scope of practice of the doctor, this has just been said. This situation is not uncommon in hospitals, often patients hanging the wrong department, then this time the doctor suggested that the patient to other departments, is responsible for the patient's life and health, rather than refusing and shirking.
Second, the critical patients, especially for the grass-roots front-line hospital doctors, encountered a critical situation, the hospital can not deal with, it is recommended to transfer to the hospital to deal with, also does not belong to the refusal.
Of course, many patients will think that doctors talk less, not a few minutes to the end of the consultation, that this is the doctor refused to receive, which is also an incorrect view.
Welcome to comment message, consultation or private message me, I will take the time to reply promptly!
Let's **** together with the concern for women's health, concern for breast science!
The questioner had a bad intention!
Learning to be a doctor is just learning a skill, a skill to make a living, a skill to make a living similar to a mason, a carpenter, a plasterer, a skill to make a living. The medical practitioner's license is only a government-recognized qualification, not an unavoidable service contract with the whole society.
The issue of social life is very complex, and there has never been a category of professional practitioners who are not allowed to say no, and there has never been a category of industry practitioners who do not have a bottom line.
Since the questioner used the word "right", what you think is not a right, but what the law of the land gives you is a right. The law does not give doctors the right to refuse patients, and the law does not give patients the right to force doctors to treat them. The law maintains a rational and harmonious medical order. The doctor and the patient are equal, in the elimination of disease is a cooperative relationship, the patient is actually entangled in their own how much "rights", entangled in the doctor has no "rights", really is sick!
Do doctors have the right to refuse to see patients?
I personally believe that this issue should also be treated on a case-by-case basis, and not on the physician's sentence: I can't see this disease, please transfer to the department, it is unreasonable to assume that the physician refused to accept the diagnosis. It is also important to be aware of the time, place, and circumstances of the case.
In principle, within the scope of the qualifications of the physician, in his duty position, in the hospital during normal working hours, (other cases separately). Physicians can not refuse to see any patient, this is the professional rules of the trade, but also medical ethics must be respected. If you don't have professional ethics, just refuse to patients, he went to where it doesn't work, such a person is not qualified to be a physician, exempt from the force to stay in the medical profession, sooner or later, will be retired out of the Bureau, fall into the dust of history.
If the patient's disease is not familiar with his specialty, professional, the physician can certainly not accept the diagnosis, advised to refer. Because the referral is to allow the patient to receive better diagnosis and treatment. Free from forced to accept the diagnosis, the patient is not favorable. An ethical physician will do so. Unless the situation is very special, life is at stake, there is no choice. In addition, if there is a difference between men and women, need to see the private parts of the opposite sex, the physician can ask for a peer accompanied by the diagnosis, but also to ask other physicians to assist in the examination, this situation can not be regarded as a physician refused to accept the diagnosis and treatment. Although it is said that in front of the physician without privacy, but in order to avoid unnecessary trouble, some things are still cautious point good.
Medical doctors, parents, the technology to excel, people should have a good heart, love, tolerance, everywhere concerned about the disease, for the sake of the patient. The patient should also consider the specific situation of the physician. We all think differently, mutual understanding, more tolerance, to create a harmonious new doctor-patient relationship. Everyone is for the sake of others, everyone give a little love, the world will become a better place!
Depending on the situation, non-professional patients should of course be rejected, the general outpatient big deal to return the registration, the emergency directly tell the patient to go to the department to register on the good. The first thing you need to do is to get your hands on a new car, and then you'll be able to get your hands on a new car, and then you'll be able to get your hands on a new car. For example, you have a cold, fever, cough and runny nose, run to the emergency room in the middle of the night, the emergency room doctor should be rejected you, but this situation is not rejected domestically, the reality is that rejected you will slap the table or even cursing, the current hospitals are also in the spirit of humanitarianism so that the emergency room to take up the night clinic and convenient outpatient (some of them only prescribe slow drugs and chronic diseases regular review of the bill) duties, which is also the industry know that the emergency room night shift busy and This is why the industry knows that the emergency night shift is busy and tiring, because 80% of them are people who are mildly ill but have decided in their hearts that they might die, and if they are not careful, they will go ballistic!
It is clear that doctors do not have the right to refuse to see a patient, and this is not allowed in any hospital. Refusing to see a patient is a violation of medical ethics and can be a dangerous practice.
First of all, the purpose of the doctor's study is to save lives, fight against diseases, relieve patients of diseases and pain, and bring patients health and happiness. The Hippocratic Oath says: "I will do my best to keep the creed for the benefit of the sick as far as my ability and judgment will allow, and I will perform my duties in this pure and holy spirit for the rest of my life. Taking this oath as an ideal, all doctors spend their lives studying hard, researching medical skills, and actively engaging in clinical practice, with the aim of realizing the dream of being a good doctor, as the saying goes, "If you don't want to be a good doctor, you should be a good doctor. Since you want to be a good doctor, you will not reject the patient, only the patient will achieve a good doctor, skin does not exist, the hair will be attached, it is difficult to imagine that a doctor who avoids the patient how to become a good doctor.
The reality is that the work of the general implementation of the doctor's first system of responsibility, which is the core of the hospital's medical system, the provisions of the hospital where the patient, are the implementation of the hospital's first system of responsibility. Hospitals are not allowed to refuse to treat patients within the scope of diagnosis and treatment, the first physician for their patients, especially for the examination, diagnosis, treatment, consultation, referral, referral, transfer, transfer to the hospital, the condition of the medical work is responsible for in the end. Any doctor should seriously treat the patients he/she sees, and if he/she can't handle the patients personally, he/she can consult them or explain to them to transfer them to other departments or hospitals for treatment. If you do not seriously receive patients, refusing to diagnose the patient down to the death of the patient, it may be involved in medical disputes, the consequences are more serious. Once a hospital encountered a child emergency admissions, the condition may be more serious, the receiving doctor did not admit but let to other hospitals for treatment, the results of the child died halfway. In the end, the first hospital and the doctor became the defendant. So the refusal of diagnosis is sometimes very dangerous!
Saving lives is the vocation of medical personnel, but there are specialties, most people will say, not his specialty can refuse to diagnose.
In this, the first to understand the concept of refusal to diagnose what: is the refusal to give patients diagnosis and treatment, and still provide assistance to patients? Or simply rude, I can not see your disease, go elsewhere to see it, so that the patient will be completely rejected out of the door? These two ways of "refusing treatment" are different in nature.
The latter approach is clearly wrong!
In order to prevent the phenomenon of refusal of treatment, I personally believe that the current implementation of the first hospital responsibility system can be a good solution to this problem. However, the specific implementation, may need the support of the relevant departments, but also to have a to put the medical staff personnel connected, available network, in order to facilitate consultation and referral.
The meaning of the first visit system is that when the patient comes to the doctor's institution, the first reception of the medical staff, to be responsible for the patient's diagnosis and treatment of the relationship between the "landing". If the patient is within the scope of his or her own practice, he or she will personally see the patient and take measures to treat him or her. If you have a case that is beyond your ability to handle, you can invite other doctors to do consultations.
And if the disease is not within the scope of their own practice, can not be put off the patient, you should contact the relevant departments, refer the patient to the relevant doctors, and ensure that the other side will be accepted. The first thing you need to do is to get your hands on a new pair of shoes or boots.
Some doctors may have a different opinion, saying that there are doctors who don't know what they are doing and have the freedom to choose. However, what they may not have thought of is that when they put on the white coat, as a special profession, they are destined to not have this so-called "right".
Whether from the point of view of ethics or rules of practice, it may be that the patient's situation is beyond your ability, but referring the patient to the right healthcare professional is also part of the job. In this regard, the patient is a vulnerable group of people, is holding the trust to come, the doctor should cherish this trust, so as to build a harmonious doctor-patient relationship.
In daily life, refusal to diagnose is common. For example, Hepatitis B, AIDS, Hepatitis C patients, go to the largest local general hospitals, some will be shirked for various reasons, in fact, it is not willing to give the patient diagnosis and treatment, but also said in the name of: to go to the specialized hospitals more professional. However, the patient is not to see the infectious disease, as the largest tertiary hospital, the state and the relevant departments of the huge resources invested, should not be in the patient diagnosis and treatment of the time to be divided into three six nine.
Doctors refused to accept patients to be specific to what the situation, in addition to running a gun for a place, not every doctor is able to cure all diseases.
The conditions must allow the patient to be saved. A lot of sick people will look at the doctor from all angles, picking on the doctor, harshly criticizing the doctor, this kind of sick people are the most stupid. There are conditions to stay it, the doctor to money by all means to stay patients down. The first thing you need to do is to get your hands on some of the most popular products and services in the world, and you'll be able to do that!
For example, a dizziness highly suspected cerebral hemorrhage patients, hospitals do not have CT, MRI equipment will certainly refuse to patients to stay. This kind of patient can only be quickly transferred to the upper level of hospitals with conditions for further training and treatment. There is no CT and other medical equipment, certainly no supporting professional medical staff, hardware and software are not equipped to treat and rescue patients with cerebral hemorrhage, the doctor refused to receive the patient is completely correct.
The doctors themselves have different professional attributes, and the diseases they see are selective. This is especially true now that there are so many different specialties, and it's not unusual for doctors to refuse to see patients.
For example, if you have an acute myocardial infarction, you will need a cardiovascular surgeon, but an anorectal surgeon will be less specialized. Anorectal surgeons will certainly refuse to see them, and of course everyone will give advice to the patient on how to find the right specialist.
Then there is the factor of the patient. The most common cause of nosebleeds is trauma to the nasal mucous membrane rupture leading to nosebleeds, on the Pentacenter (otolaryngology) to see the right, if it is caused by hematological disorders, you have to see the hematology department. I think it's a good idea to run to the gynecologist and think that menstruation has lost its way, and the gynecologist will definitely have to refuse to diagnose it.
Another problem that often occurs is that the patient's leisure time to poke a toothpick and drag the family to the hospital to sneak around, ordering the doctor to play for his injection, but coincidentally, the doctor stopped, can only be transferred to a higher level of hospital disposal.
The doctor refused to diagnose, is out of a high degree of responsibility for the patient's family, not who doctors must receive. However, doctors have always been very respectful of life, and will certainly prioritize the treatment of patients who are suffering from illnesses.