OET Reading Sample 33

OET Reading Sample 33 - Mihiraa

OET Reading Sample 33

Exploring the Ethical Dimensions of Non-Compliance with Medications in Healthcare.

Paragraph 1

The issue of non-compliance with medications presents a similarly intricate ethical landscape within the realm of healthcare. This matter intertwines medical adherence, patient autonomy, and resource allocation, all of which converge to shape the contours of healthcare delivery.

Paragraph 2

A recent article in The Journal of Clinical Ethics has thrust the topic of non-compliance with medications into the spotlight, evoking thoughtful deliberation on patient rights and societal responsibilities. Penned by Dr. Elizabeth Williams and her colleagues at St. Mark’s Medical Center, the article raises a thought-provoking question: Should patients who consistently fail to adhere to prescribed medication regimens be subject to limitations in receiving certain medical interventions? While rooted in concerns about treatment efficacy and the judicious use of medical resources, this proposition has ignited a discourse about the delicate balance between patient agency and societal well-being.

Paragraph 3

Advocates of the stance on limiting interventions for non-compliant patients emphasize the impact of medication non-adherence on treatment outcomes. Citing studies, they spotlight instances where incomplete medication courses have led to the development of drug-resistant infections or exacerbated chronic conditions. The argument gains weight from the perspective that certain interventions might be less effective or even futile in the absence of a cooperative patient. Proponents contend that prioritizing medical resources for patients who demonstrate commitment to their treatment plans is a pragmatic strategy in an era of constrained healthcare provisions.

Paragraph 4

However, this proposition is met with counterpoints from those who stress the importance of patient autonomy and medical empathy. Dr. Sarah Thompson, a respected voice in patient advocacy, cautions against penalizing individuals who grapple with non-compliance, as this approach might exacerbate feelings of guilt and hinder open doctor-patient communication. Thompson contends that a compassionate approach, centered on understanding the underlying reasons for non-adherence, could foster better patient engagement and improve overall treatment success.

Paragraph 5

Dr. Michael Chen, representing the Pharmaceutical Society, argues for a comprehensive view that encompasses both patient responsibility and systemic support. He suggests that interventions targeting non-compliance should prioritize education and support to empower patients to manage their conditions effectively. Chen underscores that addressing non-compliance as a societal concern requires addressing underlying issues such as medication affordability, patient education gaps, and potential side effects that hinder adherence.

Paragraph 6

The economic dimension of this discourse is hard to ignore, particularly in healthcare systems grappling with financial constraints. Dr. Emily Turner underscores the fiscal implications of medical interventions that might be compromised by non-adherence. She raises the question of whether it is ethical for limited healthcare resources to be allocated to interventions that might yield diminished returns due to patient non-compliance. Turner proposes a nuanced approach, wherein efforts are made to enhance adherence through targeted interventions and resource-intensive procedures are reserved for patients who demonstrate commitment to their treatment plans.

Paragraph 7

As this dialogue unfolds, parallels with other healthcare scenarios, such as non-compliance with lifestyle modifications, come into focus. Patients with conditions influenced by dietary restrictions, exercise regimens, or other lifestyle changes face challenges similar to medication non-compliance. The debate then extends to whether patients who fail to adopt recommended lifestyle modifications should be subject to similar limitations in healthcare interventions.

Paragraph 8

In conclusion, the discourse surrounding non-compliance with medications underscores the intricate interplay between individual autonomy, medical efficacy, and resource allocation. While considerations about treatment effectiveness and judicious resource use are valid, the nuances of patient agency, medical empathy, and systemic support cannot be overlooked. Striking a balance between fostering patient responsibility and upholding equitable access to medical interventions remains a complex and ongoing endeavor, requiring thoughtful collaboration between medical professionals, policymakers, and patient advocates.


Paragraph 1:

  1. What ethical considerations are involved in the issue of non-compliance with medications?
    a) Patient preferences and medical resources
    b) Medical efficacy and patient communication
    c) Patient autonomy and societal norms
    d) Medication affordability and treatment success

Paragraph 2:

  1. According to the article, why does Dr. Elizabeth Williams’ proposition raise a question?
    A) Because it challenges the conventional approach to medication compliance.
    B) Due to concerns about the misuse of medical resources.
    C) As it questions the balance between patient rights and societal interests.
    D) Because it emphasizes the importance of patient agency in healthcare decisions.

    Paragraph 3:
  2. What argument do advocates of limiting interventions for non-compliant patients put forth?
    a) Patient autonomy should always be prioritized.
    b) Limited healthcare resources inhibit medical efficacy.
    c) Incomplete medication courses can lead to drug resistance.
    d) Patient engagement is irrelevant in healthcare.

Paragraph 4:

  1. What does Dr. Sarah Thompson caution against?
    a) Limiting medical resources for non-compliant patients.
    b) sanctioning patients who struggle with non-compliance.
    c) Ignoring the patient’s feelings of guilt and hindrance.
    d) patient engagement and treatment success.

Paragraph 5:

  1. According to Dr. Michael Chen, how should interventions for non-compliance be approached?
    a) By penalizing non-compliant patients with restrictions.
    b) By focusing on medication affordability and enhancing patient responsibility.
    c) By addressing underlying issues and providing education.
    d) By allocating more medical resources and education to non-compliant patients.

Paragraph 6:

  1. What aspect of the discourse does Dr. Emily Turner highlight?
    a) The importance of ignoring non-compliance in healthcare decisions.
    b) The need to limit healthcare resources for all patients.
    c) The economic impact of medical interventions compromised by non-compliance.
    d) The necessity of considering treatment effectiveness and healthcare resources.

Paragraph 7:

  1. What parallel scenario does the text mention in relation to non-compliance with medications?
    a) Patients have challenges similar to medication non-compliance.
    b) Patients not being able to cope with the recommended lifestyle and healthcare interventions.
    c) Patients facing challenges with behavior changes.
    d) Patients receiving limited resource-intensive procedures.

Paragraph 8:

  1. What does the conclusion of the text emphasize?
    a) The importance of medical professionals’ opinions over patient advocates’.
    b) The simplicity of addressing non-compliance with medications.
    c) The complex interplay between patient responsibility and equitable access.
    d) The necessity of thoughtful collaboration between medical professionals and policymakers.




This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, businesses, places, events, and incidents are either the products of the author’s imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental. The use of the names of real organizations, such as Oxford University and the World Health Organization (WHO), is for fictional purposes only and does not imply any endorsement by or affiliation with these organizations.


Copyright © 2023 by Mihiraa. All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher at


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Content is protected !!