I am amazed that the argument in this thread is proceeding without the slightest acknowledgement of the whole history and law with respect to desegregation and civil rights. The patient has absolutely no right to care segregated by race, and it was arguably illegal for the hospital to offer it.
Why don't you one-up all of us and find the "details" yourself you PompASS, Dittohead, Bushlicking Conservative FREAK. Crawl back into Cheney's asshole and stay there.
Why don't you one-up all of us and find the "details" yourself you PompASS, Dittohead, Bushlicking Conservative FREAK. Crawl back into Cheney's asshole and stay there.
You missed the whole race aspect of my real world situation. Please address that. Try not to fall into the trap that black on white racism is justified and condoned.
Just as a reminder, you gave the following example, and I replied as you quoted in your post:
Quote:
Okay Chinney here's the situation I was in.
A radiation therapy department treating breast cancer. Poor woman has to come in each day and remove her clothes from the waste down and get on a table with her arms up. Now some black women that are treated there don't feel comfortable with white men helping with the treatment. For whatever reason. But racist none the less. Now should the department risk that woman going home, untreated, just to stand firm on some racial hatred issue? I don't thinks so. We had enough black women there that could do the treatment to accommodate.
Flip it around. White man is in there for prostate treatment. Has to strip from the waste down and get on the table. So if that white guy does not feel comfortable with a black woman doing the treatment what should we do? Label him a racist and refuse to treat? Turns out we have enough white men there to accomidate.
What do you think? Not so black and white huh?
I actually thought that my answer gave you my response to your particular examples, but if I did not make myself clear, I'll try again.
Both of your examples are easy to respond to because they involve gender situations. The response did not even have to address the race issue because we, as a society, still think that it is reasonable for people to request that undressing and other intimate procedures be before members of the same sex (although such requests cannot always be accommodated). Some posters have accused me of accommodating sexism and of a double-standard because of this, but I don?t agree. It is not a matter of sexism, it is a recognition of gender-based discomfort. Maybe it is wrong, but we as a society still recognize gender based discomfort in intimate situations. As I pointed out, I think that very few persons, even persons with very strong views on sexism, object to separate male and female washrooms. On the other hand, I think that few of us would accept going (back to) separate washrooms based on race.
Your examples would have been more telling if you had instead posed the question of whether the black woman undergoing radiation therapy could validly object to having a white female doctor or white female technician in the room or if the white man undergoing prostrate treatment in hospital could validly object to a black male doctor doing this. My answer to both these modified example would be ?no, it would not be valid? and this for the reasons I have posted earlier with respect to the main issue in this thread.
Why don't you one-up all of us and find the "details" yourself you PompASS, Dittohead, Bushlicking Conservative FREAK. Crawl back into Cheney's asshole and stay there.
...sorry mods, was having a good day until now...
WTF is wrong with you? It's a real question. What law? Is this illegal? If so what law? You seem to be everything you accuse me of.
I remember a few times when a man (or all the males in the family) would state that only females (and one hand picked male doctor) would be allowed in the birthing room so that the "honor" of the woman would not be stained.
Normally this would be OK, but in these cases the woman was in preterm labor/or the unborn baby was in severe distress (read: about to die) and the team that took care of the infant absolutely needed to be in the birthing room.
These were always Muslims and many times they would hint at violence to any male who was stupid enough to enter the womans room.
Usually we were able to accomodate these idiots. Since the Neonatal ICU (where I worked) was comprised mostly of females. But one time, the only people who were able to respond to this premature birth was a male neonatal doctor, a female nurse and myself (a male Respiratory Therapist). Well, there were 6 arab men going crazy (yelling, screaming and threatening our lives) when we walked into the room.
The doctor I was with told the men they had 2 options:
1. either shut up and let us save their babies life
2. tell us to go away (really, tell us that they didn't want any care for their baby) and they would have a dead baby on their hands.
Then he said screw-it. Either shut up and everyone but the father get out of the room or the police will escort you out and the next person who threatens any of us will go to jail.
They shut their mouths and we saved their baby.
From that day on we (the NICU) took a very had line against any crazy request and would refuse to accomodate white only, black only, Jewish only, female only, Muslim only requests. The patients and families were told that you came here for the best neonatal care in Boston and we will give your kid(s) the best care possible, but we will have to do it our way. If they didn't like it they were free to go elsewhere.
Comments
Originally posted by Chinney
Even if it is illegal?
I am amazed that the argument in this thread is proceeding without the slightest acknowledgement of the whole history and law with respect to desegregation and civil rights. The patient has absolutely no right to care segregated by race, and it was arguably illegal for the hospital to offer it.
What law is broken? Please give details.
Originally posted by Scott
What law is broken? Please give details.
Why don't you one-up all of us and find the "details" yourself you PompASS, Dittohead, Bushlicking Conservative FREAK. Crawl back into Cheney's asshole and stay there.
...sorry mods, was having a good day until now...
Originally posted by Sondjata
Ahhh you get my point.....
Ahhh, your point doesn't apply to this situation.....
Originally posted by Artman @_@
Why don't you one-up all of us and find the "details" yourself you PompASS, Dittohead, Bushlicking Conservative FREAK. Crawl back into Cheney's asshole and stay there.
...sorry mods, was having a good day until now...
Lose your job at the underground donkey show?
Originally posted by Scott
You missed the whole race aspect of my real world situation. Please address that. Try not to fall into the trap that black on white racism is justified and condoned.
Just as a reminder, you gave the following example, and I replied as you quoted in your post:
Okay Chinney here's the situation I was in.
A radiation therapy department treating breast cancer. Poor woman has to come in each day and remove her clothes from the waste down and get on a table with her arms up. Now some black women that are treated there don't feel comfortable with white men helping with the treatment. For whatever reason. But racist none the less. Now should the department risk that woman going home, untreated, just to stand firm on some racial hatred issue? I don't thinks so. We had enough black women there that could do the treatment to accommodate.
Flip it around. White man is in there for prostate treatment. Has to strip from the waste down and get on the table. So if that white guy does not feel comfortable with a black woman doing the treatment what should we do? Label him a racist and refuse to treat? Turns out we have enough white men there to accomidate.
What do you think? Not so black and white huh?
I actually thought that my answer gave you my response to your particular examples, but if I did not make myself clear, I'll try again.
Both of your examples are easy to respond to because they involve gender situations. The response did not even have to address the race issue because we, as a society, still think that it is reasonable for people to request that undressing and other intimate procedures be before members of the same sex (although such requests cannot always be accommodated). Some posters have accused me of accommodating sexism and of a double-standard because of this, but I don?t agree. It is not a matter of sexism, it is a recognition of gender-based discomfort. Maybe it is wrong, but we as a society still recognize gender based discomfort in intimate situations. As I pointed out, I think that very few persons, even persons with very strong views on sexism, object to separate male and female washrooms. On the other hand, I think that few of us would accept going (back to) separate washrooms based on race.
Your examples would have been more telling if you had instead posed the question of whether the black woman undergoing radiation therapy could validly object to having a white female doctor or white female technician in the room or if the white man undergoing prostrate treatment in hospital could validly object to a black male doctor doing this. My answer to both these modified example would be ?no, it would not be valid? and this for the reasons I have posted earlier with respect to the main issue in this thread.
Originally posted by Artman @_@
Why don't you one-up all of us and find the "details" yourself you PompASS, Dittohead, Bushlicking Conservative FREAK. Crawl back into Cheney's asshole and stay there.
...sorry mods, was having a good day until now...
WTF is wrong with you? It's a real question. What law? Is this illegal? If so what law? You seem to be everything you accuse me of.
the debate is between :
- people who think that the principle of non segregation should prevail
- people think that the first duties of an hospital is to cure patients
There is no need to go in name calling.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
- people who think that the principle of non segregation should prevail
- people think that the first duties of an hospital is to cure patients
I still don't understand how these are mutually exclusive.
Originally posted by bunge
I still don't understand how these are mutually exclusive.
They where just exclusive in this particular example. This two values should be never exclusive, but sometimes we have to dwell with the reality.
Sometimes there is conflict between our guidelines and my patients. We try to manage it at the best we could, and it's not always simple.
Normally this would be OK, but in these cases the woman was in preterm labor/or the unborn baby was in severe distress (read: about to die) and the team that took care of the infant absolutely needed to be in the birthing room.
These were always Muslims and many times they would hint at violence to any male who was stupid enough to enter the womans room.
Usually we were able to accomodate these idiots. Since the Neonatal ICU (where I worked) was comprised mostly of females. But one time, the only people who were able to respond to this premature birth was a male neonatal doctor, a female nurse and myself (a male Respiratory Therapist). Well, there were 6 arab men going crazy (yelling, screaming and threatening our lives) when we walked into the room.
The doctor I was with told the men they had 2 options:
1. either shut up and let us save their babies life
2. tell us to go away (really, tell us that they didn't want any care for their baby) and they would have a dead baby on their hands.
Then he said screw-it. Either shut up and everyone but the father get out of the room or the police will escort you out and the next person who threatens any of us will go to jail.
They shut their mouths and we saved their baby.
From that day on we (the NICU) took a very had line against any crazy request and would refuse to accomodate white only, black only, Jewish only, female only, Muslim only requests. The patients and families were told that you came here for the best neonatal care in Boston and we will give your kid(s) the best care possible, but we will have to do it our way. If they didn't like it they were free to go elsewhere.
?no point in hating, cuz who ever you hate will end up marrying into your family?