the official acted or failed to act despite his knowledge of a substantial risk of serious harm”). We have found “deliberate indifference” in a variety of circumstances, including where the prison official (1) knows of a prisoner’s need for medical treatment but intentionally refuses to provide it; (2) delays necessary medical treatment based on a non-medical reason; or (3) prevents a prisoner from receiving needed or recommended medical treatment. See Durmer, 991 F.2d at 68 (citing Monmouth County Correctional Inst. Inmates v. Lanzaro, 834 F.2d 326, 346-47 (3d Cir.1987)). We also have found “deliberate indifference” to exist where the prison official persists in a particular course of treatment “in the face of resultant, pain and risk of permanent injury.” Napoleon, 897 F.2d at 109-11 (<HOLDING>). In reaching its conclusion that the
holding that charging fees for medical services did not violate the eighth amendment where prisoner did not allege denial of medical care holding that a tortfeasor is required to pay the expenses of over treatment or unnecessary medical treatment unless such treatment was incurred by the victim in bad faith  holding that deliberate indifference to a serious medical need establishes an eighth amendment violation holding that allegations of several instances of flawed medical treatment state a claim under eighth amendment holding that plaintiff failed to state a  1983 claim based on the eighth amendment when he refused to be treated medically in the presence of corrections officers on the grounds that he was not entitled to receive medical treatment in complete privacy