While the management of treating “hateful” patients has been the subject of considerable commentary, far less attention has been paid to the ethical challenges involved in the treatment of “beloved” patients. This essay offers a non-exhaustive taxonomy of “beloved” patients that includes relatable patients, inspiring patients, empathy-inducing patients, and joyful patients, and then discusses the potential pitfalls involved in the optimal care of each group. By drawing attention to these often overlooked and unwitting risks, the hope is to mitigate both their direct impact upon individual “beloved” patients and their residual impact upon those patients who are not viewed as “beloved” by their providers.
Linn-WaltonRPardasaniM. Dislikable clients or countertransference: a clinician’s perspective. Clinical Supervision2014; 33: 100–121.
2.
StefanaA. The origins of the notion of countertransference. Psychoanal Rev2015; 102: 437–460.
3.
StouteBJ. Racism: a challenge for the therapeutic dyad. Am J Psychother2020; 73: 69–71.
4.
WinnicottDW. Hate in the counter-transference. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis1949; 30: 69–74.
5.
GrovesJE. Taking care of the hateful patient. N Engl J Med1978; 298: 883–887.
6.
StrousRDUlmanAMKotlerM. The hateful patient revisited: relevance for 21st century medicine. Eur J Intern Med2006; 17: 387–393.
7.
GundermanRBGundermanPR. Forty years since “taking care of the hateful patient.”. AMA J Ethics2017; 19: 369–373.
8.
EpsteinL. The therapeutic function of hate in the countertransference. Contemp Psychoanal1977; 13: 442–461.
9.
GreenLB. The value of hate in the countertransference. Clin Soc Work J2005; 34: 187–199.
10.
MacIntyreMRAppelJM. Legal and ethics considerations in reporting sexual exploitation by previous providers. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law2020; 48: 166–175.
11.
AppelJM. May physicians date their patients’ relatives? Rethinking sexual misconduct and disclosure after long v. Ostroff. Medicine Health Rhode Island2004; 87: 159–161.
12.
HamptonAJFisher BoydANSprecherS. You’re like me and I like you: mediators of the similarity–liking link assessed before and after a getting-acquainted social interaction. J Soc Pers Relat2019; 36: 2221–2244.
13.
MontoyaRMHortonRSKirchnerJ. Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity. J Soc Pers Relat2008; 25: 889–922.
14.
MarzukPM. When the patient is a physician. N Engl J Med1987; 317: 1409–1411.
15.
GershengorenL. Our duty to the “VIP patient.”. J Grad Med Educ2016; 8: 784.
16.
FrenklachAReicherterD. The treatment of VIP patients in academic teaching settings: applying the “difficult patient framework” to guide therapeutic response. Acad Psychiatry2015; 39: 597–600.
17.
AppelJM. When liability and ethics diverge. Focus2019; 17: 382–386.
18.
MoudatsouMStavropoulouA, et al.The role of empathy in health and social care professionals. Healthcare2020; 8: 26.
19.
WilmerHA. The doctor-patient relationship and the issues of pity, sympathy and empathy. British Journal of Medical Psychology1968; 41: 243–248.
20.
Students prefer cheerful patients. Nursing Standards1987; 2: 8.
21.
FanaroffACPratherKBruckerA, et al.Relationship between optimism and outcomes in patients with chronic angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol2019; 123: 1399–1405.
22.
MondlochMVColeDCFrankJW. Does how you do depend on how you think you’ll do? A systematic review of the evidence for a relation between patients’ recovery expectations and health outcomes?CMAJ2001; 165: 174–179.
23.
AppelJVaidyaS. Ethical dilemmas in psychiatric evaluations in patients with fulminant liver failure. Current Opinion in Organ Transplant2014; 19: 175–180.
24.
AppelJM. When scarcity meets disparity: “resources allocation and COVID-19 patients with diabetes.” Journal of Diabetes. Sci Technol2021: 1932296821991112.
25.
JonsenAR. The god squad and the origins of transplantation ethics and policy. Journal of Law. Medicine and Ethics2007; 35: 238–240.
