nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Should certain people be denied medical treatment?

Logical Fallacy

Article on the Guardian site about a survey of doctors, with the highlight being that 54% of them felt that smokers and obese people should be denied certain treatments until they improve their health situation.

The main concern seemed to be that the effectiveness of certain procedures would be affected by their lifestyle.

Having thought about it I can't really think of anything wrong with the concept, once a condition is not life threatening or too serious then a patient should be required to show an improvement and acceptance of responsibility for their own well being.

What say you AH?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/28/doctors-treatment-denial-smokers-obese

A majority of doctors support measures to deny treatment to smokers and the obese, according to a survey that has sparked a row over the NHS's growing use of "lifestyle rationing".
Some 54% of doctors who took part said the NHS should have the right to withhold non-emergency treatment from patients who do not lose weight or stop smoking. Some medics believe unhealthy behaviour can make procedures less likely to work, and that the service is not obliged to devote scarce resources to them.
However, senior doctors and patient groups have voiced alarm at what they call "blackmailing" of the sick, and denial of their human rights.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Pottler

Yeah right, us smokers contribute more in taxes than the rest of ye. I demand my right to be cut open and have stuff replaced. I've paid €9.10 a packet for long enough to have earned it.:)

SEPT 23 1989

The tax on the cigarettes and fatty foods pay their wages

they can go fcuk themselves

Mr. Incognito

Okay this as AH so we expect trolling but seriously.............

This one is fat and this one smokes. No treatment for them.

What's next- oh yeah, poor people.

Lets all go watch movies sponsored by drink and fast food companies, lets go watch formula one promoted by cig companies.

Health care should never be refused to anyone. Ever.

And those Doctors took a hippocratic oath so that survey meanings nothing.

What sort of society do you want to create here?

Jebus, I though health care was the most basic level of human decency.

Pottler

Any hope they might deny service to gingers? Never trusted em. Give me a fat smoker anyday.

Hande hoche!

Seems a very slippery slope.

arse..biscuits

Yes. People who are healthy.

[Deleted User]

At first I was a bit eh no wtf - give them care
but then I thought, what about stuff like kidney or liver ops/transplants to alcoholics who won't try quit?
So there is a line somewhere

then from the article

One doctor said that denying in-vitro fertilisation to childless women who smoked was justified because it was only half as successful for them.

Another said the NHS was right to expect an obese patient or alcoholic to change their behaviour before they underwent liver transplant surgery.

But obesity could merit such bans, Gerada said. "Obesity is a different matter. Operating on a very fat person is more dangerous. Anaesthetically it's harder, the surgery is harder and the rehabilitation takes longer. So it's medically legitimate to withhold treatment from some very overweight people. But it should not be done for social reasons," she said.

It doesn't sound off the wall to me

Logical Fallacy

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Okay this as AH so we expect trolling but seriously.............

This one is fat and this one smokes. No treatment for them.

What's next- oh yeah, poor people.

Lets all go watch movies sponsored by drink and fast food companies, lets go watch formula one promoted by cig companies.

Health care should never be refused to anyone. Ever.

And those Doctors took a hypocratic oath so that survey meanings nothing.

What sort of society do you want to create here?

Jebus, I though health care was the most basic level of human decency.

I think the reality of health care is vastly different, shrinking budgets, wasted money and an increase in demand is starting to take a toll. I know a few doctors, nurses and medical students and there seems to be a constant worry about the rising demands on the health care system.

I don't think it's a lot to ask that people take a little better care of themselves and if something can be done to improve a person health without needing medical intervention then there is nothing wrong with pushing that option.

I am also unsure how the survey means nothing...it's obviously a reflection on how certain doctors feel so I think it's worth discussing.

Finally, how the hell is my post "trolling"?

Is simply wishing to discuss a contentious issue in AH enough for something to be branded trolling now?

monkeypants

Fat people have rights?

cartell_best

Pottler wrote: »

Yeah right, us smokers contribute more in taxes than the rest of ye. I demand my right to be cut open and have stuff replaced. I've paid €9.10 a packet for long enough to have earned it.:)

Took the words right out of my mouth! fair play to ya!

southsiderosie

I think that doctors should be the ones making the call as to whether or not patients should receive treatment based on their individual assessment of that patient - not some blanket ban, or some bureaucratic decree. The examples in the article makes a pretty clear statistical case for withholding some kinds of medical treatments due to obesity or a smoking habit, and that makes sense.

Pottler

southsiderosie wrote: »

I think that doctors should be the ones making the call as to whether or not patients should receive treatment based on their individual assessment of that patient - not some blanket ban, or some bureaucratic decree. The examples in the article makes a pretty clear statistical case for withholding some kinds of medical treatments due to obesity or a smoking habit, and that makes sense.

since when did we start taking Doctors seriously? Every feckin Doctor I know smokes like a chimney anyway. Most of the Nurses I know do too. If they find it hard to operate on fat people, just get them bigger knives, longer handles and step ladders. Miners lights might be handy as well. We can't start letting Doctors make life and death decisions.

southsiderosie

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Okay this as AH so we expect trolling but seriously.............

This one is fat and this one smokes. No treatment for them.

What's next- oh yeah, poor people.

Lets all go watch movies sponsored by drink and fast food companies, lets go watch formula one promoted by cig companies.

Health care should never be refused to anyone. Ever.

And those Doctors took a hypocratic oath so that survey meanings nothing.

What sort of society do you want to create here?

Jebus, I though health care was the most basic level of human decency.

Most organ transplants have long waiting lists. Why should a doctor recommend someone for a liver transplant if they don't have their drinking under control - especially when there are other patients who are willing to make the lifestyle changes necessary in order to increase the likelihood of a successful transplant?

People need to take some responsibility for their health, and I would imagine that it would be very frustrating for doctors to see patients who are unwilling to make long-term lifestyle changes instead of having expensive, invasive medical procedures that are often just a short-term solution anyway (gastric bypass and stomach-banding being a prime example).

Dubhlinner

But obesity could merit such bans, Gerada said. "Obesity is a different matter. Operating on a very fat person is more dangerous. Anaesthetically it's harder, the surgery is harder and the rehabilitation takes longer. So it's medically legitimate to withhold treatment from some very overweight people. But it should not be done for social reasons," she said.

For safety reasons, Dr.Trollsberg requires that you get yourself down to a healthy BMI before we start your gastric band surgery operation. UMAD fatty?

girl2

Pottler wrote: »

Yeah right, us smokers contribute more in taxes than the rest of ye. I demand my right to be cut open and have stuff replaced. I've paid €9.10 a packet for long enough to have earned it.:)

Am not a smoker, but have a tendency to agree with this.

Plus then there's the whole human rights argument if ya wanna go there??

Jimoslimos

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Health care should never be refused to anyone. Ever.

Nobody is saying it shouldn't but in a healthcare system where funds are limited there is a certain amount of compromise to be made. Think of it as medicine by numbers.

Anyway as some posters have pointed out, it isn't unusual for a doctor to postpone certain surgery/treatment until the patient has lost weight.

southsiderosie

girl2 wrote: »

Am not a smoker, but have a tendency to agree with this.

Plus then there's the whole human rights argument if ya wanna go there??

So IVF is a human right? A right that someone whose refusal to quit smoking will significantly reduce the effect of?

People need to get some cop-on.

My name is URL

I don't see how it could work tbh. Are they talking about only refusing treatments for conditions directly caused by whatever unhealthy lifestyle choices the patient has made, or for any and all conditions they may have?

Chuck Stone

I have recently had a debate about whether the state makes money from smokers or not and the numbers are by no means conclusive that smokers contribute more to the exchequer than they take out in services.

opinion guy

The most important part of that article

Doctors.net.uk, a professional networking site, found that 593 (54%) of the 1,096 doctors who took part in the self-selecting survey answered yes when asked: "Should the NHS be allowed to refuse non-emergency treatments to patients unless they lose weight or stop smoking?"

So basically the people with strong opinions did it amounting to bias and **** results.

This story comes under the ryanair school of advertising if you ask me. Say something controversial to get your organisation some free press

girl2

southsiderosie wrote: »

So IVF is a human right? A right that someone whose refusal to quit smoking will significantly reduce the effect of?

People need to get some cop-on.

Look, I hate cigarettes, I hate everything about them, but that person is right about the taxes they pay on cigarettes.

I don't know that IVF was mentioned in the original post. I was referring to the fact people should not be refused medical treatment.

mattjack

southsiderosie wrote: »

I think that doctors should be the ones making the call as to whether or not patients should receive treatment based on their individual assessment of that patient - not some blanket ban, or some bureaucratic decree. The examples in the article makes a pretty clear statistical case for withholding some kinds of medical treatments due to obesity or a smoking habit, and that makes sense.

By allowing doctors that choice to decide who they provide treatment to creates exclusion to different members of society.

What guidelines would you use ?

Withholding treatment is denying health care which is regarded as a need and also withholding treatment also unbalances equalisation between more and less fortunate at all levels in society.

Dempsey

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Okay this as AH so we expect trolling but seriously.............

This one is fat and this one smokes. No treatment for them.

What's next- oh yeah, poor people.

Lets all go watch movies sponsored by drink and fast food companies, lets go watch formula one promoted by cig companies.

Health care should never be refused to anyone. Ever.

And those Doctors took a hypocratic oath so that survey meanings nothing.

What sort of society do you want to create here?

Jebus, I though health care was the most basic level of human decency.

Well said

Pottler

If it's any consolation, I don't want IVF- the thought of being forced to perform, ...shudder. We are talking about Involentary Vaginal Fellatio right? No idea what being forced to pleasure strange women against my will has to do with the provision of healthcare though.

Knight who says Meh

Only catholics should be treated. They own the hospitals and pay all the wages. Non catholics and Atheists can build their own hospitals if they want treatment.

Jimoslimos

mattjack wrote: »

Withholding treatment is denying health care which is regarded as a need and also withholding treatment also unbalances equalisation between more and less fortunate at all levels in society.

'Withholding' is the wrong word to use in these circumstances. Rather giving preferential treatment to someone else, who it is felt would benefit more.

Cancer patients get treated differently depending on what stage/grade they are at. Money in the health system is finite and difficult decisions need to be made.

KKkitty

Who's next in that firing line, the elderly. Oh sorry sir but it's your fault you got old and needed a hip replacement so feck how much tax you've paid to the country you're not getting it.

woodoo

Pottler wrote: »

Any hope they might deny service to gingers? Never trusted em. Give me a fat smoker anyday.

That's kind of an anti-Irish British attitude to give **** to ginger people. When did Irish people start it. Most of us have red haired family friends or relatives.

Gyalist

girl2 wrote: »

Look, I hate cigarettes, I hate everything about them, but that person is right about the taxes they pay on cigarettes.

What evidence do you have that smokers contribute more to the Exchequer than the cost of their habit?

Pottler

woodoo wrote: »

That's kind of an anti-Irish British attitude to give **** to ginger people. When did Irish people start it. Most of us have red haired family friends or relatives.

unlucky.