Were the doctors wrong in this case?

Question

this guy went to the hospital for a head injury and was told he needed a rectal exam. he refused and they sedated and forced it on him, and when he punched one of the doctors he was arrested for assault (article here: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/16/forced-rectal-exam-stirs-ethics-questions/

now, the question is were the doctors wrong to do this? or were they merely doing their jobs and acting in the patient's best medical interests? (asked in philosophy because it is a moral/ethical issue)

Answer 1

i think the doctor was acting in the interest of the patient, the patient was an idiot for not letting the doctor. but still the patient should have the choice of refusing any treatment.

what the doctor should have done was to have explained the risks of refusing the treatment, offered sedated treatment, and if the patient still refuses, have the patient sign a contract indicating that he had refused the treatment and understood the risks. because otherwise if the patient would have turned out paralyzed a few days later, then he would have sued the doctor anyways.

Answer 2

oh yes the docter was completly worng if the man has a head  injery that it on his HEAD there should b no reson for the dr to be looking and exaning his rectel area i noe i would b lyk wtf are u doing becase leat time i cheched my head is not up my a**

Answer 3

I have leart from first hand experience, that some Dr's assume the role of God.

They may have difficult jobs and cop a lot of flack - but they are the ones that choose thier careers so they should literally roll with the punches when thier actions leave so very much to be desired.

Answer 4

I would say the doctors were wrong my body is my realm. A doctor is there to support me. If I choose a course a action that leads to my death - that is my choice and responsibility.

Answer 5

Speaking as a citizen, I would definitely say NO- the hospital personal had no right to impose such an exam on the man.

What in gods name was the reason for the exam? Unless a patient signed a release for such exam, the hospital should definitely be sued.

"In the patients best medical interest" in such a case is pure drivel and utter nonsense. I hope a hospital administrator will post an answer to this question.

Answer 6

Wrong and right are so subjective that it was only "wrong" if it was illegal.

Answer 7

Yes. It shows Medical Incompetence and it violated the man's civil rights.

Answer 8

More information would be needed before anyone could really come to the final conclusion about whether the doctors were right or wrong in their choice of action.

For example: was there a medical rationale for requiring a rectal exam?

Was the head injury affecting the patients ability to make his own informed decisions regarding care?

Was the patient cognitively intact normally?

Was the patient sedated when he allegedly punched one of the doctors?

Until these and probably more questions have an answer then the patient should not be touched if he is not consenting, so the doctors would be wrong.

Answer 9

they arnt allowed to do it because a patient can refuse any medical treatment and the guy should not have been arrested for assault because the doctors pretty much assaulted him

Answer 10

There are some details missing, but based on the report I'd side with the doctors with this. First, he was being seen for a head injury. That might have impaired his ability to make informed refusal of a procedure, and is difficult to assess in some cases. Second, head injuries have a fairly high association of associated spinal injuries. If they suspected he was impaired, doing the test against his will is well within normal procedures. Third, we're not talking about a major procedure here. We're talking about a version of the dreaded prostate exam, with the proverbial gloved finger going up. This test would aslo serve another purpose, because in most cases a fecal sample would be obtained and tested to make sure he wasn't suffering from any bleeding. So, there was nothing wrong in the doctors performing what they did.

   I think where the issue is cloudier is what happened after he struck the doctor. If they suspected he was mentally impaired, then it would be hard to hold him responcible for striking out. In fact, his violent reaction could be seen as confirmation of head injury. To arrest him on a misdemeanor charge accomplished nothing but to embarrass the man. That smacks of retaliation to me, for an unruly, obnoxious patient. So the doctors would be off the hook for the procedure from me, but the doctors and/or staff would be otherwise still be under the gun for what happened after the patient was extubated.

Answer 11

The doctors were in the wrong because they do have to do what is best for the patient, but they must also do what the patient wants.