Choosing who to treat
BMJ 2015; 351 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h5828 (Published 03 November 2015) Cite this as: BMJ 2015;351:h5828All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
The article by Chinthapalli K mentioned that some pediatric practices in US refused to treat unvaccinated children [1]. The argument that unvaccinated children pose a risk to themselves and others in the hospital is unethical and baffling. The argument is similar to the situation where HIV patients are denied treatment just because of their HIV status. It amounts to discrimination and violating the basic health rights of the patient.
The argument that unvaccinated status among children amounts to non-confidence in physician’s advice and hence a reason for not providing treatment is also unethical and discriminatory. First of all children consent to treatment is not accepted legally and ethically and they cannot decide for themselves whether to get vaccinated or not vaccinated [3]. It depends on the decision taken by their parents. So why punish the child for the fault for which they are not responsible?
Some patients who smoke regularly have difficulty in quitting smoking due to low confidence and addiction leading to withdrawal symptoms [2]. Hence it is unethical to deny treatment to smokers. Instead doctors in addition to providing required treatment should refer these patients to tobacco cessation clinics to overcome the barriers to quit smoking.
References
1. Chinthapalli K. Choosing who to treat. BMJ. 2015;351:h5828. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h5828
2. Mohammadnezhad M, Tsourtos G, Wilson C, Ratcliffe J, Ward P. "I have never experienced any problem with my health. So far, it hasn't been harmful": older Greek-Australian smokers' views on smoking: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:304.
3. Satyanarayana Rao KH. Informed consent: an ethical obligation or legal compulsion? J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2008 Jan;1(1):33-5.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Re: Choosing who to treat
Whom. That is all.
Competing interests: No competing interests