AIBU to think refusing treatment from non-white medical professionals should have consequences?

[MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack]

There has apparently been a significant rise in racism towards NHS staff, with a growing number of people refusing to allow non-white NHS staff to treat them. This is sad but not surprising given the shift in society as a whole towards people expressing their racism much more openly.

https://news.sky.com/story/nhs-staff-experiencing-unconscionable-levels-of-racist-abuse-survey-finds-13569575

I have always admired the commitment of NHS staff who treat all patients with care and compassion, even when those patients are rude and abusive. But if people are actually refusing to let certain staff provide treatment, surely there should be consequences for this?

AIBU to think that everyone has the right to refuse treatment if they so wish, but if a patient refuses treatment from a medical professional simply because they don't like the colour of that medical practitioner's skin, then they should then forfeit the right to receive that treatment on the NHS. So they can either go without or find the money to be treated privately by a medical professional of their choice?

There would need to be signs warning people of the consequences of their choices, of course, but if someone doesn't want a Black or Asian radiographer carry out their x-ray, then fine... they just don't get an x-ray.

...when normally the death penalty is considered abhorrent. It's another discussion, which won't progress because of the double standards applied throughout.

How can you prove that the reason a person refuses treatment from a particular provider is based on race or skin colour? Yes, you may currently have some outspoken (or mentally challenged) people who are happy to say so right out loud, but that could change if new policies are put into place. If you try to create penalties for refusal for non-approved reasons, all people have to do is lie about why they're refusing, unless it all boils down to not being able to refuse treatment from any non-white medical professional for any reason whatsoever.

I don't see how you could enforce this, even if you think it's reasonable.

Perhaps where there is trauma and a professional assessment that a male doctor would have a damaging impact on someone's mental health, for example?

That PP is either being willfully obtuse or is one of the people the article is about.

I recall in Tooting, in the late 90s, an Asian fertility consultant was hired instead of a white fertility consultant. The former had poorer outcomes than the latter. The appointment was in response to the local Imams who felt Asian men would be happier with a person from their own culture treating their wives and improve engagement in that community.

I didn't comprehend it and my view, then and now, is that the NHS should appoint the best possible doctor always. The initiative meant that fewer women overall would have successful pregnancies. Now as then, I don't think anyone should chose a Dr based on colour.

Yes, it's an odd one.

It's not okay to kill a murderer, even if you caught them stabbing multiple people on camera, because the state shouldn't have the power to kill people - but it is okay for the state to let a racist die when they could be saved, because while injured, they demanded a doctor of a particular ethnicity.

I think perhaps it's because a lot of people see passively letting someone die as much worse than actively killing someone? It's a weaselly sort of view to take, and silly to boot, because either way the state's (in)action caused that person to die. But there we go! A bit of a double standard.

I think people should be able to choose who treats them. If they don’t want to be treated by someone (for whatever reason), then people should retain that right. If we remove that right, where do we draw the line? If I don’t want a man treating me, what happens then?
I Know by choosing not to have a man treat me, I might have to wait/ come back on a different day.

On a personal level, I think it’s stupid to refuse treatment based on the skin of the person treating. I’d also not want the medical proffeisonal to be put in a position that makes them unhappy.

They’re not being given the death penalty though are they. They are refusing treatment.

Mr Awah also claimed he had experienced patients telling him they cannot understand him, even though English is the only language he speaks

From the article.

This is what I was referring to, along with your comment on Russian accents. I probably wouldn't be able to hear Mr Awah, and would tell him I couldn't understand him because when I say "I can't hear you," and try to explain why, people just speak louder, which makes it worse. Shouting also changes the shapes your mouth makes when you speak.

I wouldn't be able to hear Mr Awah whether he was speaking with a heavy Nigerian accent or a heavy Midlands accent. One of my BILs is from Essex, and it took me years to be able to understand him properly.

And how would a woman prove she has suffered trauma? What degree of trauma would be acceptable? Would the professional assessment be done by a female HCP? What would it consist of?

I think you have to take the ethical approach of treating racists and even choosing someone of a particular ethnicity of a patient is in the verge of denying themselves life saving care unpalatable as it may be. You face the ethical dilemma of letting some one did for being racist.

if refusing refusing treatment is being done on a religious rather than ethnic basis (though there is overlap can't we take the pragmatic step of just simply requiring staff to not wear religous symbology?. It might help and emphasis e the religious neutrality of the NHS.

although we find racism abhorrent we can neglect the fact challenging patients can be labelled racist not because they are racist but they are just challenging or maybe inquisitive.about the quality of care. Is it fair to ask a black nurse to explain what she is doing in a particular or is this racist and there is an inference the black nurse doesn't know what she was doing?

Absolutely this!

What religious symbology do you want to remove?

.

Is it actually because of their skin colour, or is because their English is poor/they have a strong accent that’s difficult to understand? My DM (in her 90s) has to have someone with her at her oncology appts because she can’t understand the consultant. She’s also deaf which doesn’t help.
She’s also averse to getting taxis as she can’t understand the foreign drivers.

Ffs

And yeah - you do hate rainbows

If they were left to die, it would be because they themselves had chosen not to accept treatment. What do you think should happen in that situation if there were no white HCPs available? Should treatment by non-white HCPs be forced on the patient against their will?

The reality is that the NHS would not actually just leave someone to die in that situation. But if they did, it would be due to the decisions made by the patient.

Carrying out clinical assessments on possibly already traumatised women is a ridiculous suggestion, not to mention unethical. They are entitled to request a same sex clinician for whatever reason. The OP seems blinded by her own bias. Race does not leapfrog women's comfort. Both need to be tackled with reasoning.

Good question. I suppose any well recognised religous regalia that was not necessary to perform the job. A pragmatic solution like this would just simply reduce opportunities for religious prejudice and emphasise the secular nature of healthcare. For instance a crucial could be discreetly placed under rhe uniform.

This sounds like one of those internet rumours…

Well, given that these patients are calling people monkeys and dirty foreigners, saying that they don't want their wives/girlfriends touched by anyone from an ethnic minority background or stating that black people frighten them, do you think it's just about their accents?

In the NHS you do have the right to choose your consultant and hospital. Obviously this may delay treatment but can sometimes reduce waiting lists.

It can be very important in specialist areas where some consultants can perform operations others can’t or have far more experience in a certain area. It can also be important if you have lost faith in your consultant for some reason. My experience of this is in reconstructive surgery after cancer where different consultants offer different reconstruction options and some get better results than others.

My worry with a rule like this about racism would be that it could make it difficult for patients to exercise this choice. They might have good non-racist reasons for rejecting a non-white doctor and NHS staff would need to make a judgement as to the validity of their reasons.

Considering many many Britons are not white and many foreigners are white then clearly it is nothing to do with accents and language.

The idea this is white people being racist is utterly absurd to anyone who works in the public sector.
The worst I have personally dealt with, and it has been a lot, has all been from men who are recent immigrants to the UK - in the last 3/4 years.

A crucifix? I don't think religious symbols are the problem here.

No, it was quite true. I was a member of a public and associated body at the time. It involved St George's Hospital.