Does a doctor have the right to refuse a patient: regulations

Each person, turning to a medical institution that provides services within the framework of compulsory medical insurance, expects to receive adequate and timely medical care. However, in practice, patients in public clinics are often refused admission. This happens for various reasons. The refusal can be justified by the fact that in the off-season there is a larger than usual influx of patients and doctors for everyone and, ultimately, there are no coupons and appointments are not made on a first-come, first-served basis. Let's take a closer look at whether a doctor can refuse to see a person who has sought medical help.

Grounds for failure to provide medical services

Federal legislation “On the fundamentals of health protection” of November 21, 2011. (Federal Law) the following provisions are enshrined:

Medical institutions that operate on the basis of the compulsory health insurance program (CHI) must provide their assistance to persons with a compulsory medical insurance policy free of charge. It does not matter whether it is a state hospital or local authorities.
The second rule concerns the provision of emergency care. It is provided to anyone who applies to the medical structure free of charge.

If, for one of the above services, a health worker demands payment or does not comply with the requirements of the law in another part, such actions are recognized as an offense for which the employee will be held accountable.

If a physician does not want to work with a patient without legally regulated circumstances, his act is punishable under an article of the Criminal Code.
The crime consists of the doctor’s inaction in relation to the patient, which caused detrimental consequences for the latter’s health.

So, when a doctor has the right to refuse a patient, the law says the following:

If there are circumstances that prevent the provision of the service. They manifest themselves in the form of dangerous natural phenomena, special military actions, accidents and other emergency situations that prevented the doctor from reaching the patient.
If the doctor is sick.
If, due to physical or mental methods of influence, a person is unable to provide assistance.
If there are no means used to perform the work (tools, medicines).
If a person independently refuses to receive medical services. Relatives can also refuse for the patient. However, the doctor must understand that if there are circumstances in the form of an emergency situation in which it is necessary to act immediately, or if the victim is unconscious and there are no relatives ready to give consent, medical actions are carried out immediately without permission.
If the applicant systematically does not follow the course of treatment or other doctor’s recommendations or behaves inappropriately. There is also an exception here, which coincides with the previous paragraph; measures must be taken if the situation is emergency; in case of inappropriate behavior, it is determined whether the patient poses a threat to himself or others. If the answer is yes, then you will have to treat the patient and inform relatives about the mental disorder.

A doctor’s right to refuse to work with a patient is exercised by contacting a higher-ranking official (head physician, manager) with a statement to stop interacting with the patient. If the manager satisfies the applicant’s demands, the person is transferred to another employee for treatment.

What to do if the clinic does not have the required specialist?

Short answer:

Unfortunately, a large number of citizens face this situation every day. First of all, if something is bothering you, you need to come to an appointment with a therapist; if necessary, he will refer you to a doctor of a narrow specialization. If such a doctor is not in this medical institution, then the referral must be issued to the place where such a doctor conducts appointments.

What to do in such a situation

Remember that if you are advised to see, for example, a neurologist or an ophthalmologist, and such a doctor is absent for some reason from a medical institution, the therapist must write you a referral without any excuses, just to another clinic. If they refuse you, you can safely go and write a statement to the head doctor. Also. When you arrive at another clinic, you do not have the right to refuse to see a specialist, especially if you came with a referral or with acute pain. The same rules apply for diagnostic procedures.

Conclusion

Don’t let yourself be deceived if they tell you that I can’t write out a referral to another clinic, insist on yours, this is your right and the doctor is obliged to provide medical care in full, but if this is not possible, then the referral from him should be written out at that time. a medical institution where such a specialist is available, in cases of severe pain, can call an ambulance if it really makes sense. If you come without a referral to a specialist at a clinic other than your own, also without pain or anything else, you should also be admitted and this should be done free of charge under the compulsory medical insurance policy. Of course, it is best not to get into such situations, especially when something is bothering you, but unfortunately we are not able to take control of everything, especially when it comes to health issues.

Mandatory provision of services

In circumstances where emergency care is necessary, even private clinics that operate on a paid basis are required to provide services free of charge. This provision is provided for in paragraph 2.1 of the Rules, which were approved by Resolution No. 1006 of October 4, 2012. The same position is supported by Federal Law No. 323 (FZ) Part 2 of Art. 11. According to the rule, medical workers and institutions should not refuse emergency free care to a patient.

The rule is strictly protected by law and has no exceptions, since it is one of the fundamental principles of protecting human health, as well as the general legal foundations of the priority of the life and health of a citizen over other benefits.

Emergency assistance involves the provision of medical services for:

threat to life in case of serious illness;
if the threat is created by a person’s special condition;
for other life-threatening diseases.

This rule applies to medical institutions of all forms of ownership.
The rule of inadmissibility of failure to provide assistance includes the case of a citizen who is sick with tuberculosis or the Human Immunodeficiency Virus. The patient must report the condition. Concealing an illness is considered an offense, since withholding such information may cause the doctor to become ill. That is, the qualification of the violation corresponds to Article 122 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, when the perpetrator put another person in a position dangerous to health.

The face of morality

“It turns out that the doctor “seems to” refuse the patient, but in practice the refusal is “not real.” The patient is still a priority...

“Of course, not all medical workers may like this. Especially in the private healthcare system. But it must be recalled that every medical worker takes a doctor’s oath in accordance with Art. 71 of Law No. 323-FZ. In addition, the first national congress of doctors of the Russian Federation on October 5, 2012 adopted the Code of Professional Ethics for Physicians. This document does not contain any indication of the unconditional possibility of a doctor refusing a patient. On the contrary, it spells out the doctor’s obligations to conscientiously perform his professional duty.

Previously, in accordance with the Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on the protection of public health dated July 22, 1993, the attending physician could, in agreement with the relevant official, refuse observation and treatment if this does not threaten the life of the patient and the health of others, in cases of non-compliance by the patient with instructions or internal regulations Health care facilities (Articles 58 and 59). However, as is clear from the above, this norm did not fully comply with the constitutional foundations and general principles of health protection. Now you can refuse to treat a patient only strictly in accordance with Part 3 of Art. 70 of Law No. 323-FZ, observing the conditions for refusal specified above. Failure to comply with these provisions may result in civil claims and administrative fines. For example, for refusal to provide medical care, Rospotrebnadzor holds medical organizations accountable under Part 3 of Art. 14.1 Code of Administrative Offences.

Anyone who has worked with patients knows that treating a person who does not trust the doctor is very difficult. Sometimes it's simply impossible. Therefore, under such circumstances, it is advisable - in your own interests - to make a replacement. Find a doctor who can build communication with the patient. Recently, the Minister of Health of the Russian Federation Veronika Skvortsova , commenting on the discussed possibility of removing unemployed citizens from the compulsory medical insurance system, indicated that this contradicts constitutional norms on health protection. This is a very positive statement not only in substance, it clearly demonstrates that decisions made in the health care system must be consistent with constitutional foundations and general principles of legislation. Including in relation to a doctor’s refusal to provide medical care to a patient.

Hospital refusal to attach a citizen

The Federal Law contains several norms that, by their nature, can be interpreted ambiguously. On the one hand Art. 21 assumes that a citizen has the right to choose any hospital to receive medical services with the consent of the doctor. But part two of the same norm does not contain any mention of the specialist’s consent to serve the citizen. What does practice say?

It should be noted that the opinions of the judges of the first and higher instances were divided.

The first believe that doctors have the opportunity not to provide services to citizens who, by territorial basis, belong to another hospital. They emphasize the importance of observing the principle of division into areas and generally share the position of health workers.

It is also interesting that Article 6 of the Federal Law contains a list of patients’ rights, which does not include the ability to force medical staff to obey the client’s wishes. The list of eligibility is exhaustive. But in fact, in the course of appeal, the plaintiffs seek not only binding to the desired clinic, but also payment of moral damages.

Appeal judges put themselves in the patient's position.

Their conclusions are as follows:

Part two does not establish the obligation to have the doctor’s consent to provide medical services;
the principle of distributing the population to hospitals based on the place of registration is not a priority;
and in the end, the doctor is not involved in deciding the issue of attaching the patient to the hospital.

Moreover, the decision of the Samara Regional Court stipulates that even if the workload on medical staff exceeds the norm, this is not a reason to leave a person without medical care. In general, court decisions contain conclusions that are satisfactory for patients.

When is it permissible not to serve a client?

Much depends on the relationship between doctor and patient. Here you need to understand that cooperation where the participants fail to find a common language will not bear fruit for either side. There is a Code of Ethics for health workers, according to which failure to establish contact with the person seeking treatment is grounds for severing the relationship. This formulation is quite vague and is entirely based on the subjective understanding of the situation of the treating employee. It is this interpretation that gives the medical staff the opportunity to choose the client.

As has already been said, the main condition when providing assistance is mandatory is the emergency nature of the situation. The law also obliges the employee to notify management of the decision. This measure is necessary for the normal organization of the labor process, so that the head physician can choose another employee for service and the work of the medical organization proceeds smoothly without unnecessary fuss and hype.

Thus, the doctor should not report in detail and the reasons why he will not serve the patient if the situation meets two circumstances:

no emergency;
timely notification to management.

If these conditions are present, it is difficult for the visitor to prove the uneven actions of the physician.

How best to issue a refusal

To minimize the risks of complaints and be prepared to defend rights in court, a member of the medical staff should take into account the following points:

If the reason for the reluctance to cooperate is the client’s inappropriate behavior, you need to find confirmation of this fact. It is advisable that as many eyewitnesses as possible be present at the incident. The situation is recorded in a special act, which is signed by witnesses. They could be nurses, security guards or others.
After the health worker decides not to treat a particular person, he writes a local note addressed to the manager. It explains why such a decision was made and attaches evidence, if any. You also need to confirm the fact that there are no conditions for the mandatory provision of services. Then he asks to be removed from working with the citizen and to find him another employee. The document is drawn up in two copies and submitted to the authorities for signature.

Next comes the boss. He issues an order to change the doctor. The decision made is also handed over to the patient or sent by mail.

What problems may arise

In practice, situations arise that are difficult to resolve.

They can be classified into those that arise in:

state and local government clinics;
private paid hospitals.

In the first case, the problem arises if all the doctors did not want to serve the client, and the boss could not prevent this, since everything is legal. What to do if not a single therapist wants to provide services to a citizen. In this case, all responsibility for resolving the conflict falls on the shoulders of management.

The boss invites the citizen to a conversation and explains the situation to him. It is necessary to show the doctors' explanations, how they are argued, and also indicate the norms of the law that correspond to the situation. As a solution, the manager suggests that the patient enter into an agreement with a specialist from another medical institution.

When it comes to services in a private clinic, the process of providing services is usually preceded by the conclusion of a contract. If health workers refuse to work with a person, the contract is terminated unilaterally.

To avoid claims and payments of compensation, it is necessary to stipulate in the agreement a clause under which it is possible to terminate the relationship at the initiative of one party. Judicial practice also shows that it is convenient for both participants to understand what to expect from certain actions.

It is appropriate to specify in the contract clauses on the list of circumstances, the procedure and consequences of completing the agreement. The medical organization should indicate the conditions provided for by Federal Law Article 70 and include a provision on the possibility of refusal in the absence of contact and working relationship.

If these recommendations are taken into account, the risks of losing the case are minimized.

In fact, it turns out that citizens do not know in what cases a doctor has the right to refuse a patient. It doesn’t even occur to many that medical staff have such an opportunity. Therefore, visitors should be informed about it in advance, so the client will understand that he is dealing with an equal subject and will not allow himself to be rude or disrespectful.

Of course, in public hospitals it is problematic to conduct personal conversations with each visitor, but information can be placed on stands or posters.

An example from judicial practice

A clear example is a case from judicial practice in which an emergency department doctor was prosecuted.

After a shift in the mine, citizen Petrov and his friends drank a fair amount of alcohol, which caused a fight, as a result of which he lost consciousness. Despite severe abdominal pain, the emergency room doctor did not attach any importance to this, and attributed the short-term loss of consciousness to the effects of alcohol.

After the injection of an anesthetic drug, the patient was sent home. He went to rest, he felt worse, the pain resumed, which is why he died in the morning as a result of extensive internal bleeding. The doctor made a mistake because he did not fully examine the patient and did not take into account that the effect of alcohol masks the clinical picture of acute pathological processes.

The doctor was charged with Article 124 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and sentenced to 4 years in prison. In addition, he lost the right to practice medicine.

Problems with the application of Art. 70 Federal Law

A person who wants to change a therapist or a highly specialized specialist must write a corresponding application.
The paper describes the reasons for the decision. Afterwards, the document is transferred to the authorized official. The latter, in turn, must consider the application within three days. The employee then informs the applicant about options for replacing the doctor. A person chooses one of the specialists at his own discretion. To appoint a new doctor, the visitor's consent is required. The ability of a health worker to choose a client is enshrined in legislation in the form of the right to refuse to observe a citizen or to perform an abortion if the patient’s life is not in danger.

Clarification of the provisions on turnover: the experience of other countries shows that a doctor may not perform his work for reasons of conscience. Moreover, the clinic or individuals should not be judged or held accountable for not agreeing to use abortion methods. In Art. 70 also provides for the right of an obstetrician-gynecologist not to artificially terminate the life of an embryo for personal reasons. The only circumstance that deprives the right is a medical indication for an abortion. It is prescribed if the patient’s life is in danger.

The doctor notifies management of the decision.

In fact, problems arise in how to correctly apply the rule:

It is not entirely clear from the wording what coordination of actions with superiors means. The health worker must ensure that the news is correctly conveyed to the manager.
The next problem concerns the subject with whom the approval is taking place. Surely this issue should be clarified in the internal instructions of the medical organization.
Another important issue concerns the possibility of refusing an ambulance worker. It turns out that the specifics of its work are such that it excludes this right, since ambulances are mainly provided in emergency cases.
Finally, it should be noted that the legislation does not say a word about specialist doctors, who may be the only ones in the hospital capable of providing a certain medical service.

To solve the above problems, at the local level the head physician has the right to issue a local act that would regulate the procedure for refusing a client.

Lawyers recommend including the following provisions:

in the application, the employee must indicate the grounds for the decision;
appoint a person responsible for replacing the doctor;
indicate the timing and procedure of the procedure;
also indicate how the client is notified of the replacement.

Unfortunately, the normative regulation of this issue does not provide an exhaustive answer to all questions. However, if the clinic’s management takes sufficient organizational action on site, the problem will be solved much easier and faster.

What punishment awaits a specialist for illegal refusal?

For the fact that the health worker did not provide the assistance that he was obliged and could provide, the following sanctions are applied to the perpetrator:

enshrined in the Criminal Code - articles 124, 293;
those provided for by civil law regarding the provision of services.

According to norm 124 of the Criminal Code, sanctions in the form of a fine, compulsory labor, and arrest are applied to the doctor. One of these types of punishment awaits the perpetrator for ignoring the requests of the victim in the provision of medical services. In order for an act to be qualified as a crime, the victim must have suffered damage of moderate severity (Part 1) or more serious consequences (Part 2). If inaction causes death or serious injury to health, the violator will face imprisonment for up to 4 years.

293 art. establishes the elements of negligence, which manifests itself in poor quality work or evasion of official duties. Unlike Art. 124 there are several possible consequences here, depending on which the sanction changes.

Outcomes are listed in ascending order from least damage to greatest:

Part 1 - serious harm to human rights;
Part 1.1 - particularly large negative consequences;
Part 2 - serious harm to human health or death;
Part 3 - death of two or more people.

Under this standard, the maximum penalty is seven years' imprisonment. Under both standards, the punishment is accompanied by deprivation of the right to practice medicine.

Case study: Gr. Sidorov was engaged in construction at his dacha. I consumed some alcohol during the process. At a certain moment, he fell on the bricks and felt pain in his chest. After that I went to the local doctor. The latter decided that since the person was intoxicated, then nothing bad had happened. The health worker did not examine the patient, but prescribed a painkiller and sent him home. Gr. Sidorov felt worse and called an ambulance. On the way to the hospital, Sidorov died, and the doctor was sentenced to two years in prison with deprivation of special rights under Art. 124 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Everything is on trial

— Do private owners have more freedom in this sense?

— Medical organizations that provide paid medical services also cannot refuse to help a patient, since they enter into a public contract (clauses 1, 3 of Article 426 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). And this position was also reflected in the above-mentioned ruling of the Constitutional Court on the complaint of Martynova E.Z. As the Constitutional Court indicated, the paid provision of medical services represents the implementation of the freedom of economic activity guaranteed in the Russian Federation, the right of everyone to freely use their abilities and property for entrepreneurial and other economic activities not prohibited by law (Article 8, Part 1; Article 34, Part 1, Constitution of the Russian Federation) and is carried out by medical institutions within the framework of relevant agreements. To such agreements, as follows from paragraph 2 of Art. 779 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the rules of Chapter 39 “Paid provision of services” of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation apply. In turn, Russian legislation classifies the provision of paid medical care as entrepreneurial activity carried out under public control. Agreement on the provision of paid medical services (medical care) in accordance with clause 1 of Art. 426 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is recognized as a public agreement, that is, an agreement concluded by a commercial organization and establishing its obligations to provide services that such an organization, by the nature of its activities, must perform in relation to everyone who turns to it. At the same time, a commercial organization does not have the right to give preference to one person over another with regard to concluding a public contract, except in cases provided for by law and other legal acts. An organization’s refusal to conclude a public contract if it is possible to provide the consumer with the appropriate services is not allowed, and if it evades concluding a public contract, the other party has the right to go to court with a demand to compel the conclusion of the contract and for compensation for losses caused by an unjustified refusal to conclude it (clause 3 Article 426 and paragraph 4 of Article 445 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). The mandatory conclusion of a public contract, which is an agreement on the provision of paid medical services, if there is an opportunity to provide the corresponding services, also means the inadmissibility of the unilateral refusal of the contractor to fulfill obligations under the contract if he has the opportunity to fulfill his obligations (provide the person with the corresponding services), since otherwise In this case, the requirement of the law for the mandatory conclusion of a contract would be deprived of any meaning or legal significance.

A very important thesis of the Constitutional Court in the ruling of June 6, 2002 is an indication that such a restriction of freedom of contract for one party - the performer (in this case - a medical institution providing paid medical care), taking into account the significant actual inequality of the parties in the agreement on the provision of medical services and the special nature of the subject of the contract (including the uniqueness of many types of medical services, the dependence of their quality on the qualifications of the doctor), is aimed at protecting the interests of the citizen (patient) as the economically weaker party in these legal relations, ensuring the realization of his right to medical care . The Constitutional Court also indicated that when considering cases, courts must proceed from the fact that legitimate reasons for terminating a contract for paid medical services cannot be recognized as those that are determined solely by the will of the person providing these services.

How to bring the perpetrator to justice

The victim has the right to deal with the issue of bringing a health worker to justice personally or through a representative. If a person is unconscious, relatives come into play. You need to act only with a clear understanding that negative consequences have a direct connection with the inactivity of medical staff.

The actions of the victim are reduced to the following stages:

To begin with, the cause-and-effect relationship between damage and punishment of assistance must be documented. For this purpose, a medical examination is carried out. The conclusion can be issued by both a public clinic and a private structure that has permission to conduct research.
The next stage is optional, but possible and desirable. The applicant applies administratively to the head physician or head of the medical organization with a complaint, where he demands compensation for damage and puts forward his demands. The application is reviewed by an official within 30 days. If the response of the medical institution does not satisfy the victim, it is time to go to court.
The main evidence of the plaintiff’s right position will be the result of the examination. However, if it was not carried out, the judge issues a ruling ordering the study. When the results are ready, if the connection between the act and damage to health is established, proceedings begin under the article of criminal law under which the situation fits.

Judicial practice shows that patients are in a more advantageous position than medical workers. Thus, the client does not have an obligation to be observed by a specialist who, for some reason, does not suit him. A person has the right to refuse the services of a particular physician at any time. At the same time, the management cannot leave a person without help; the citizen must be offered to choose a doctor from whom he is willing to undergo treatment. For doctors, refusal has a more serious meaning; its implementation is carried out exclusively in cases provided for by law, in a certain order.

Where to complain and will complaints help?

As for complaints and appeals regarding the quality and availability of medical care, everything is ambiguous: if you complain about the actions of a doctor, he will probably be punished (and most often financially). But if the city is small and there is only one doctor in this specialization, in the future this may lead to a biased attitude towards the patient.

However, at present, complaints remain perhaps the only effective mechanism for protecting the rights of patients.

If a patient encounters any problems (he was prescribed obviously ineffective homeopathic medicines or was refused a referral to a specialist), there is a certain order of where to complain:

Insurance Company. It is the insurance representative who is the patient’s first assistant. Considering that it is insurers who pay for the provision of medical services to patients, they have influence on all doctors, right up to the chief physician.

It often happens that the insurance company itself will solve the problem for the patient, after which they will simply tell him where to go to get a coupon to make an appointment with a doctor.

chief physician You can submit an application to him, in which you describe in free form what exactly happened and what is required of him. The application must indicate the time frame within which it must be responded to (usually within the legal 14 days). If there is a doctor in the clinic, but there is a waiting list for many months, the head physician will help. If there is no doctor, he will help issue a referral. But if it is impossible to help at all, then the head physician is powerless;
written complaints to the insurance company, the territorial compulsory medical insurance fund, the regional Ministry of Health and the prosecutor's office - they resort to this when they cannot achieve their goal “peacefully”.

But even if there is only one specialist with the required qualifications in the city, and he sees only in a private clinic, and you have to travel hundreds of kilometers to another doctor, even the prosecutor’s office is unlikely to help. However, there is a way out here: you can go to a private clinic at your own expense, and then try to get the money back

through the court.

Of course, the main thing is that this visit to a specialist is prescribed by a therapist, otherwise no one will compensate for anything.

If the approved deadlines are violated, you will again have to complain to the same authorities. In addition, you can connect Roszdravnadzor and local health authorities (for example, a department). This can be done either in writing, during a personal visit, or via the Internet. Typically, the websites of these regulatory organizations have special feedback forms where you can leave a complaint, indicating your contact information. All requests are processed: even thanks are answered by email, and the complaint will certainly have to be sorted out thoroughly.

So the law protects the rights of patients quite well. You just need to remember that filing a complaint will not increase the number of doctors and will not add several hours of appointment time to them every day.

Most likely, if the patient is squeezed into an appointment schedule

, the doctor will simply have to work longer - and he is not always entitled to additional payment for this.

Algorithm of actions when a doctor refuses to accept a patient

The Russian legal space provides several ways for aggrieved patients to protect themselves from unscrupulous doctors. However, you will have to contact the court, law enforcement agencies or other organizations:

on their own initiative;
having evidence of refusal.

The right to free treatment is reflected in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Current legislation has been drawn up on its basis. But in order to hold the offender accountable, the fact of refusal to provide assistance should be recorded. In addition, you will have to prove the need for it if the doctor did not want to hospitalize the patient.

Step 1: Failure Recording

Communication with a doctor according to current standards occurs on the basis of a document. The patient must have an appointment card. This document should be copied (ask the reception desk for a duplicate). However, the referral itself is not proof of the specialist’s reluctance to conduct an appointment.

It is necessary to record the refusal in writing with the involvement of witnesses.

Employees of a municipal institution do not have the right to refuse to work with patients without reason. Therefore, the doctor must name the reason for this behavior. It is necessary to require a written explanation from a specialist. The latter is obliged to provide this on the basis of current legislation.

In addition, at the very first moment you should ask for contact information from the people who were present during the unpleasant communication. They can be brought in as witnesses.

Step 2: complaint to the head of the clinic

If at the first stage it was not possible to resolve the conflict, then you should go from the doctor’s office to the clinic administration. The algorithm of actions is as follows:

Ask for the first and last name of the chief physician.
Write a complaint detailing what happened, including:
time of incident;
contact details of witnesses;
reasons indicated by the doctor, or lack thereof.

Attention: the manager must provide a response in writing within 30 days.

If the state of the body does not tolerate such a long wait, then you will have to contact another specialist. You must immediately ask the manager to refer the patient to one, if he is available in the hospital. If there is no longer a doctor in the required specialty, then the head of the institution is obliged to notify the person where he can get the appropriate help.

Step 3: appeal to the insurance company

Every citizen of the Russian Federation has a compulsory health insurance policy. The document contains a telephone number for providing information support. You should call the insurer and describe the situation. This specialist must do the following:

Inform the citizen about his rights.
Explain what to do under the current conditions.
Recommend the nearest medical facility where you can get help.
Record the complaint.
Depending on the situation, it is recommended to write an appeal.
Conduct an audit of the institution's activities.
Organize legal protection of the patient’s rights (no need to pay a lawyer).

If medical care is needed immediately, then insurers should call the clinic and demand an immediate response.

It is important to understand that hospitals receive money for each patient. Receiving a complaint from a person about a doctor’s behavior is a serious nuisance. As a rule, at this stage the conflict is resolved. But there are several other methods of influencing a careless doctor.

Step 4: contacting a government agency

Administration of the provision of medical services to the population is carried out by a specialized government agency - the regional ministry. This creates local structures - departments. An offended citizen can write a complaint to the department whose powers include control over the hospital in question.

The text of the appeal is identical to the complaint submitted to the head of the clinic. You need to submit it to the government agency in one of the following ways:

take it personally in two copies: give the first one to the responsible person;
on the second, put the document registration details;

send by mail with acknowledgment of receipt.

Step 5: contact law enforcement

Supervision over the activities of organizations that implement the constitutional rights of citizens is carried out by the prosecutor's office . This government agency also considers citizens’ complaints. It makes sense to contact the prosecutor's office if the doctor's reluctance to admit or hospitalize the patient has caused harm to the latter. It can be expressed:

in the deterioration of the body's condition;
in loss of ability to work;
in material losses (I had to pay for treatment, for example).

If a person has been seriously injured as a result of the actions (inactions) of doctors, then they should write a statement to the police. The behavior of a negligent doctor may constitute a crime.

Step 6: filing a claim with the court

This stage will only be needed for those citizens who suffered damage as a result of the doctor’s inaction. Moreover, losses will have to be documented. A statement of claim is sent to the court. It includes:

costs of paid services that the doctor was obliged to provide free of charge;
payment for treatment of relapses of the disease, if any;
losses associated with loss of ability to work (receipt of disability);
the cost of travel to another city, as well as accommodation there, if you had to look for the necessary specialist in another locality;
moral costs.

Each point of the claim must be proven. This is why the documents collected during the preliminary stages are needed. The appeal to the court sets out all the actions taken by the plaintiff. Complaints and appeals to authorities are proven by copies of them and the responses received.