• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Racist and sexist NHS patients to be turned away from non-emergency care

zimmer

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Racist, homophobic and sexist patients can be turned away from non-emergency care at NHS trusts from April after a crackdown on abuse.

A separate survey published by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman found that one in five mental health patients do not feel safe in NHS care.

More than half of people with mental health problems in England also said they experienced delays to their treatment, while four in 10 (42%) said they waited too long to be diagnosed.

Read more: Racist and sexist NHS patients to be barred from non-emergency care | Metro News
Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: Metro - Home | Facebook
Click to expand...

A few things:

1. This shows healthcare is not a right.

2. These practitioners took a Hippocratic Oath.

3. Though I disagree with patients acting violently and abusive... that’s unfortunately part of the job. See Pt. 2.

4. Delays, long wait lists and inferior service are normal with government systems.
 
zimmer said:
A few things:

1. This shows healthcare is not a right.

2. These practitioners took a Hippocratic Oath.

3. Though I disagree with patients acting violently and abusive... that’s unfortunately part of the job. See Pt. 2.

4. Delays, long wait lists and inferior service are normal with government systems.
Click to expand...


Or in our system, just not have service at all if you can't afford it.
 
zimmer said:
A few things:

1. This shows healthcare is not a right.

2. These practitioners took a Hippocratic Oath.

3. Though I disagree with patients acting violently and abusive... that’s unfortunately part of the job. See Pt. 2.

4. Delays, long wait lists and inferior service are normal with government systems.
Click to expand...

A doctor does not have to care for a person spewing hate at them... that is ridiculous.
 
ElChupacabra said:
Or in our system, just not have service at all if you can't afford it.
Click to expand...

That doesn't exist in The United States. It's illegal to refuse someone medical care.
 
zimmer said:
A few things:

1. This shows healthcare is not a right.

2. These practitioners took a Hippocratic Oath.

3. Though I disagree with patients acting violently and abusive... that’s unfortunately part of the job. See Pt. 2.

4. Delays, long wait lists and inferior service are normal with government systems.
Click to expand...

Same is true in the US
 
apdst said:
That doesn't exist in The United States. It's illegal to refuse someone medical care.
Click to expand...

Wrong. That only applies to emergency medical care
 
apdst said:
That doesn't exist in The United States. It's illegal to refuse someone medical care.
Click to expand...

Only in an ER.. Everything else can refuse care for any reason.. educate yourself instead of posting nonsense


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
zimmer said:
1. This shows healthcare is not a right.
Click to expand...

I agree with this...healthcare is not a "right."

It is a service provided by individuals who have devoted time and effort to study, train, practice in order to develop the skills needed to provide that service.

They are not slaves, or automatons. They work for a living and to make a profit from those skills.

Their service can be given freely, or refused freely. You pay, and you submit to their examination and treatment.

Thus, one cannot "demand" their service, claiming it is your "right" to compel them whether they want to or not.

I wish people would remember that in their drive to declare what constitutes "rights."
 
zimmer said:
A few things:

1. This shows healthcare is not a right.

2. These practitioners took a Hippocratic Oath.

3. Though I disagree with patients acting violently and abusive... that’s unfortunately part of the job. See Pt. 2.

4. Delays, long wait lists and inferior service are normal with government systems.
Click to expand...

This proves that the dictates of UTOPIA will not be denied...this is a "do or die" thing...all who refuse to conform will be tossed overboard as the human garbage that they are.

WE USED TO BE BETTER
 
Captain Adverse said:
I agree with this...healthcare is not a "right."

It is a service provided by individuals who have devoted time and effort to study, train, practice in order to develop the skills needed to provide that service.

They are not slaves, or automatons. They work for a living and to make a profit from those skills.

Their service can be given freely, or refused freely. You pay, and you submit to their examination and treatment.

Thus, one cannot "demand" their service, claiming it is your "right" to compel them whether they want to or not.

I wish people would remember that in their drive to declare what constitutes "rights."
Click to expand...

They can in the US for emergency. That is a right
 
Captain Adverse said:
I agree with this...healthcare is not a "right."

It is a service provided by individuals who have devoted time and effort to study, train, practice in order to develop the skills needed to provide that service.

They are not slaves, or automatons. They work for a living and to make a profit from those skills.

Their service can be given freely, or refused freely. You pay, and you submit to their examination and treatment.

Thus, one cannot "demand" their service, claiming it is your "right" to compel them whether they want to or not.

I wish people would remember that in their drive to declare what constitutes "rights."
Click to expand...

Of course this is unlike any number of public services that conservatives have no problem demanding...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BlueTex said:
Of course this is unlike any number of public services that conservatives have no problem demanding...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Hmm, I was not talking about "public services."

But let's go there.

Taking a public service position is a JOB, paid for with tax dollars.

So yes, if one accepts a position as a "public servant," then it follows one must perform the job to the best of one's ability if one wishes to keep the job. Just like any other job.

Meanwhile, a public servant is still not a slave. They don't have to take any abuse simply because they accept tax dollars in exchange for their services.

Ultimately one can also QUIT the "job," and work on in private practice.

Or do you think if most medical practitioners prefer private practice to public service, leaving you with the least skilled leftovers...that you can COMPEL them to serve?

vegas giants said:
They can in the US for emergency. That is a right
Click to expand...

Actually, they can only be required to provide "stabilizing care" under the EMTALA, and even then, only those facilities that participate in Medicare. Emergency Medical Treatment & Labor Act (EMTALA) | CMS

A medical practitioner simply walking down the street could freely ignore an accident or other "emergency" situation, if they so choose. Some do, some don't.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
Hmm, I was not talking about "public services."

But let's go there.

Taking a public service position is a JOB, paid for with tax dollars.

So yes, if one accepts a position as a "public servant, then it follows one must perform the job to the best of one's ability if one wishes to keep the job. Just like any other job.

Meanwhile, a public servant is still not a slave. They don't have to take any abuse simply because they accept tax dollars in exchange for their services.

Ultimately one can also QUIT the "job," and work on in private practice.
Click to expand...

You are the only one talking about slaves
 
Captain Adverse said:
Hmm, I was not talking about "public services."

But let's go there.

Taking a public service position is a JOB, paid for with tax dollars.

So yes, if one accepts a position as a "public servant, then it follows one must perform the job to the best of one's ability if one wishes to keep the job. Just like any other job.

Meanwhile, a public servant is still not a slave. They don't have to take any abuse simply because they accept tax dollars in exchange for their services.

Ultimately one can also QUIT the "job," and work on in private practice.

Or do you think if most medical practitioners prefer private practice to public service, leaving you with the least skilled leftovers...that you can COMPEL them to serve?
Click to expand...

Can we assume you oppose anti-BDS oaths?
 
BlueTex said:
Can we assume you oppose anti-BDS oaths?
Click to expand...

Why are you deflecting?

Start your own thread...I am talking about not having to endure abusive conduct from members of the public simply because one is a public servant.

That medicine is a profession, and the people who practice it have a right to the free exchange of their labor.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
Why are you deflecting?

Start your own thread...I am talking about not having to endure abusive conduct from members of the public simply because one is a public servant.

That medicine is a profession, and the people who practice it have a right to the free exchange of their labor.
Click to expand...

So you do not have a problem telling professionals they have to support a particular political position simply because they are public servants?
 
apdst said:
That doesn't exist in The United States. It's illegal to refuse someone medical care.
Click to expand...
Bull****, happens daily when insurance is denied or runs out.

Sent from my Honor 8X
 
vegas giants said:
Wrong. That only applies to emergency medical care
Click to expand...

And people are being thrown in jail for medical debt. Bankrupted, so its not like they get free care. And capitalist scum prey on these poor people
 
zimmer said:
A few things:

1. This shows healthcare is not a right.

2. These practitioners took a Hippocratic Oath.

3. Though I disagree with patients acting violently and abusive... that’s unfortunately part of the job. See Pt. 2.

4. Delays, long wait lists and inferior service are normal with government systems.
Click to expand...
1) This shows that healthcare isn't a unconditional right (like pretty much all other rights).

2) Doctors don't actually take the Hippocratic Oath. In England and Wales, doctors follow GMC rules and guidelines (and equivalents for other healthcare staff), many of which will cover elements of the Hippocratic Oath but also address practical realities just like this one.

3) It is unfortunately an all too common part of the job. That doesn't mean medical staff (and other patients or visitors) have to just take anything thrown at them (metaphorically or literally). Refusing to provide non-urgent treatment until a patient stops being disruptive is a perfectly valid aspect of that.

4) Which this has absolutely nothing to do with. The time and effort wasted dealing with disruptive patients does directly impact the care other patients receive though, regardless of the underlying healthcare system.
 
HonestJoe said:
1) This shows that healthcare isn't a unconditional right (like pretty much all other rights).

2) Doctors don't actually take the Hippocratic Oath. In England and Wales, doctors follow GMC rules and guidelines (and equivalents for other healthcare staff), many of which will cover elements of the Hippocratic Oath but also address practical realities just like this one.

3) It is unfortunately an all too common part of the job. That doesn't mean medical staff (and other patients or visitors) have to just take anything thrown at them (metaphorically or literally). Refusing to provide non-urgent treatment until a patient stops being disruptive is a perfectly valid aspect of that.

4) Which this has absolutely nothing to do with. The time and effort wasted dealing with disruptive patients does directly impact the care other patients receive though, regardless of the underlying healthcare system.
Click to expand...

The US Military cares for enemy combatants... that the Brits claim to be able to refuse treatment to racists is unethical.

I despise racists... but they should not be denied medical treatment because of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom