Should HCPs Refuse Treatment After Patient Violence? An Opinion Piece

This essay presents an opinion piece on whether a healthcare professional (HCP) has the right to refuse treatment to a patient who has been violent. The author argues against this right, emphasizing that refusal to treat violates ethical principles like beneficence and non-maleficence, which prioritize patient well-being and minimizing harm. The essay also highlights the importance of upholding professional duties and obligations, as defined by deontological ethics, which requires HCPs to prioritize patient care. Furthermore, the piece asserts that refusing treatment infringes upon the patient's right to healthcare and could damage the HCP's reputation and the broader reputation of healthcare professionals. The author supports their arguments with references to ethical theories, professional codes of conduct, and research on workplace violence in healthcare settings.

Running head: WRITTEN OPINION PIECE 1
Opinion Piece: A Health Care Professional (HCP) Experiencing Violence from A Patient Has
the Right to Refuse Treatment Provision
Name
Institutional Affiliation

WRITTEN OPINION PIECE 2
Introduction
Healthcare workers are exposed to high risks of violence in their work settings.
Workplace violence in healthcare settings is a common and underreported phenomenon with
reports indicating that between 8% and 38% have experience physical violence at least once
in their careers. Patients and visitors account for the highest perpetrators of violence in the
workplace (Alsaleem et al. 2018). Violence has a negative impact on the healthcare
providers, who are left in a dilemma of whether to refuse to threat the patient, or to continue
their services. In my opinion, healthcare professionals who experience violence from a
patient has no right to refuse to provide healthcare services to the patient. The healthcare
professional must continue attending to the patient with while following the necessary
standards of practice. Therefore, I oppose the topic that "A health care professional (HCP)
experiencing violence from a patient has the right to refuse treatment provision.”
Refusal to Treat is a Violation of Professional Ethical Principles
Failing to provide healthcare services to violent patient goes against the ethical
principles of healthcare. The principle of beneficence provides a guide for decision-making in
such dilemmas (Summers & Morrison, 2009). When a healthcare provider is faced with a
situation to choose whether to do right or good, is an ethical priority and may provide a
solution to the issue. The provision is similar to the principle of utility which states that it is
important to generate the largest possible ratio of good over evil. In the situation where a
patent unleashes violence on a healthcare provider, the choice to continue with care provision
entails doing good, over failure to attend to the patient. Patients often experience
psychological distress and anxiety that may trigger uncontrolled emotion.
Healthcare providers are ethically expected to act to ensure least harm in situations of
clinical dilemma. In the situation of violence, failure to provide care to the patent may cause
deterioration of his or her condition, which could cause more harm than violence against the

WRITTEN OPINION PIECE 3
healthcare provider. Similarly, the utilitarianism ethical theories argue that a person should
make the choice that has optimal benefits a large number of people regardless of the
prevailing circumstances such as personal feelings and social constraints (Reddy & Mythri,
2016). Violence by a patient may offend the healthcare provider. An alternative to fail to treat
the patient may harm the patient and his or her family. Utilitarian decision makers focus on
making decision that yield maximum good. This means that the rights of one person may be
infringed to ensure the benefit of more people.
Refusal to Treat is Failure to Perform the Required Duties and Obligations
Health ethics require that researcher adhere to the set standards by the professional
regulatory authorities (Dawson 2011). The deontological ethical theories posit that a
healthcare providers should adhere to their duties and obligations in decisions that involve
ethics. In deontology, decisions are made based on a person’s duty and obligation (Reddy &
Mythri, 2016). Doctors have a duty to prioritize patient care as their first concern and ensure
effective and safe practice, they are also tasks with the responsibility of protecting and
promoting the health of individuals and communities (Medical Board of Australia 2014).
Nurses, who are important healthcare providers, have a role to act professionally and
maintain professionally practice. They roles include critically thinking and analysing practice,
engaging in therapeutic relationships, and conducting comprehensive care and assessments
on patients (Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia 2016). The healthcare provider
should therefore treat the patient despite being engaged in violence because it is ethically
correct to do so.
Failure to Treat Is an Infringement of Rights of the Patient
When a healthcare provider continues with patient treatment despite experiencing
violence, he or she maintains his reputation and the reputation of the profession. The society
regards doctors with respect and understand that patients have a right to treatment. The

WRITTEN OPINION PIECE 4
ethical theories that are based on rights argue that societies establish rights, protect them and
give them the highest priority (Reddy & Mythri, 2016). Rights that the larger population
endorses are considered to be ethical and correct. It would be unfair to discontinue treatment
on the patient without considering the factors that resulted in the violence. The virtues ethical
theory dictates that a person is judged by his or her character rather than actions that
contradict the normal behaviour (Reddy & Mythri, 2016). This means that refusal to treat the
patient without assessing the factors that triggered violence violates his or her right to
healthcare.
. Conclusion
Violence in clinical settings may arise from a colleague or a patient. Patients who
unleash violence on healthcare providers may trigger negative emotions and devastation
among the professionals. However, my argument is that a healthcare provider who
experiences such violence should not refuse to treat the patient for three main reasons. First,
refusal to treat the patient is a violation of ethical principles of beneficence and least harm or
non-maleficence. The principles require a healthcare provider to make decisions that benefit a
larger number of people even if it infringes on the rights of others. The second reason is that
refusal to treat the patient is failure to act according to the healthcare provider’s duties and
obligation. The deontological theories argue that in an ethical dilemma, healthcare providers
should prioritize the accomplishment of their duties (Barrett et al. 2016; Reddy & Mythri,
2016). Finally, refusal to treat the patient may be regarded as wrong by the society and
damage the reputation of the healthcare provider and healthcare professionals at large.
Patients often trust their doctors and believe that they are competent and will treat them with
compassion and integrity (Medical Board of Australia 2014). The society upholds a right to
healthcare and protect it. Refusal to treat the patient may be regarded as an infringement to
the right and damage the reputation.

WRITTEN OPINION PIECE 5
References
Alsaleem, S. A., Alsabaani, A., Alamri, R. S., Hadi, R. A., Alkhayri, M. H., Badawi, K. K.,
Badawi, A. G., Alshehri, A. A., & Al-Bishi, A. M. (2018). Violence towards
healthcare workers: A study conducted in Abha City, Saudi Arabia. Journal of family
& community medicine, 25(3), 188–193. Doi:10.4103/jfcm.JFCM_170_17
Barrett, D. H., Ortmann, L. H., Dawson, A., Saenz, C., Reis, A., & Bolan, G. (Eds.).
(2016). Public health ethics: cases spanning the globe (Vol. 3). Springer International
Publishing.
Dawson, A. (Ed.). (2011). Public health ethics: key concepts and issues in policy and
practice. Cambridge University Press.
Medical Board of Australia (2014). Good Medical Practice: A Code Of Conduct For Doctors
In Australia. Retrieved from https://www.medicalboard.gov.au/Codes-Guidelines-
Policies/Code-of-conduct.aspx
Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia (2016). Registered Nurses Standards for Practice.
Retrieved from https://www.nursingmidwiferyboard.gov.au/Codes-Guidelines-
Statements/Professional-standards/registered-nurse-standards-for-practice.aspx
Reddy, M. S., & Mythri, S. V. (2016). Health-care Ethics and the Free Market Value
System. Indian journal of psychological medicine, 38(5), 371–375. doi:10.4103/0253-
7176.191387
Summers, J., & Morrison, E. (2009). Principles of healthcare ethics. Health Care Ethics. 2nd
ed. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 41-58.