@vernscw An interesting topic...I can understand a doctor refusing to do a procedure that may actually cause harm ("first, do no harm"), but a doctor refusing to do a harmless procedure simply because the patient doesn't want to follow the overall recommended course of treatment is hard for me to understand...if it makes the patient happy and is not harmful, then why not do it?...it reeks of "I know what is best for you", but that assumes that all patients have the same goals, which is not the case. Sometimes a patient would prefer to just have the symptoms treated, or just a particular problem treated, as in your case, and not aggressively seek an overall cure for everything, especially when the path to a cure is painful, or if a patient simply doesn't want to live to be 105 years old.
I don't know if Aquablation is potentially harmful or not, but doctor should respect the patient's right to just want to have a few more years without pain, and not want to be tortured just so that they can live to be 105 years old.
It sounds like in your case you were saying to the doctor "I don't want to be tortured into living to be 105 years old, I just want a few more peaceful years of being able to pee somewhat normally".