Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What if it was an Asian couple asking for an Asian nurse!?? Would we still be complaining about it? or what if it was the other way around? would we still make a fuss if a black mom wanted her kid attended by a black nurse??? I see a lot of hypocrycy here on one hand, and on the other why can't a mom choose???
Why is she suing the hospital if the parent of the patient requested this? It is his right to request treatment based on his race, religion, sex, or whatever.
Whether it was in good taste is a matter of public opinion.
Cursory glance gives me the opinion that the nurse has no suit because the hospital was treating the patient and patients family with their "reasonable" requests in mind. If the patient was having a severe medical issue at the time, the hospital would than put the patients medical needs first over the preferences of the family.
If I am a patient and I request that I only be treated by female nurses, would the male nurses have a suit? Or would I if the hospital denied my "reasonable" request?
Same basis.
Actually, the parent had no such right to request any such thing and it is far from a reasonable request as per the Civil Rights Act (1964).
Having worked for my husband in the legal and insurance/ liability field and having worked as an RN for 17 years, I think I have some experience in dealing with this.
The patient also has rights here. And the patient here is an infant child, who has the right to the best care available to him or her. The patient's continuity of care was being disrupted by the fathers unreasonable and fundamentally unfair demands. He was being first and foremost, unfair to his daughter/son, a patient hospitalized in the NICU. He is not a sound judge as to which professional would be best to care for his child. The supervisor has decided this. Interruption of the patient's care, with reckless disregard for said patients well being by a non medical person for arbitrary reasons, would strike me as wanton, and and in disregard of professional decisions.
Had I been the charge nurse, I would have called Child Protective Services. I also would have defended my professional staff. Had the man attempted to remove the baby from the hospital I would have called security and then the police. This would have been my nursing judgement.
What strikes me a sadly ironic, is that for decades, slave owners, followed by racist whites have had no problem permitting their children to be raised by black women, with little or no education but good common sense, judgement and a good heart. At the very least, at least these white people were color blind when it came to the proper care of their children.
Because of the nature of the task, and several other factors, nursing was one of the first professions to open it's doors to black women, where they have served for well over 100 years along with others of all races and rather recently, men.
As a professional, the woman has every right to expect her employer to stand up for her in this situation. She worked hard for her degree and was a specialist in this field. It is both demeaning and degrading for her to be relieved of her duties, from which she most likely derived great satisfaction.
Her employer should have stood by their professional employee and not by the hateful whims of a racist ignoramus and bad parent.
There is no question who is right here. The most wrong part is the hospital in my eyes, because it they they who were the front line in preventing this ignorant bully from running their delivery of care. The most wronged party, in my eyes, was the patient, who had a his care interrupted by an irrational parent. There was a window of opportunity for state officials to step in and to see that this poor excuse for a parent had his own biases and hate filled agenda above that of his own child.
I feel certain that the court will ultimately prevail against this father and I further hope that the hospital is held liable for permitting this idiot from giving care.
For the record, I am not black, I am a WASP and an inactive RN.
What if it was an Asian couple asking for an Asian nurse!?? Would we still be complaining about it? or what if it was the other way around? would we still make a fuss if a black mom wanted her kid attended by a black nurse??? I see a lot of hypocrycy here on one hand, and on the other why can't a mom choose???
Yes. It would be. It's ignorant and arbitrary. The well being of the patient is not being considered.
Ditto for a black parent demanding only black nurses.
Hurley hospital has released a statement. My take is that the father's request was initially granted by the supervisor in a lame attempt to defuse the situation, then denied by someone higher up. Hopefully the supervisor was disciplined, if not fired, for this!
Quote:
Flint, Michigan -- Hurley is proud to be the safety net provider for this community for over 105 years. We value the support of the patients who entrust us with their care and the dedication of our physicians and staff. This includes Nurse Battle and her quarter century of professionalism and dedication.
While I cannot comment on the lawsuit and answer questions, I can share some insights. The issue was triggered by a father of a baby who demanded that no African American nurse be involved in his baby’s care. Upon making his demand, he then showed the nurse’s supervisor his swastika tattoo, which created anger and outrage in our staff. This resulted in concern by supervisors for the safety of the staff. For these reasons, the request was initially evaluated; however, the father was informed that his request could not be granted.
Hurley Medical Center has had a rich history and reputation of supporting and valuing diversity and remains committed to our policy of non-discrimination. As a premier academic medical center, Hurley strives to continuously provide education to our staff. This issue will be used in future training sessions to ensure that employees are prepared to handle situations such as this. We appreciate the support of the Hurley staff, along with the community’s concern and involvement, as we publicly clarify the facts of this case. The medical center looks forward to a quick and amicable resolution.
If I had been the supervisor and the father had come to me with that request I would have assured him that ALL of my nurses were excellent, caring, highly skilled employees. If he then repeated his demand I would have told him that his request was unreasonable and inappropriate.
If he then caused a scene I would have called security. If he had wanted to argue I would have suggested that he speak to hospital administration.
The supervisor should not have placed such a note on the clipboard or reassign the nurse. Had I been the employee involved I would have reported the incident right away to the supervisor's manager.
The supervisor most certainly did not handle the situation correctly.
I am not African American, and my background is nearly 20 years in the medical field.
What is so annoying about these types of "reports" is there will never be any follow-up. Reporters throw a "bomb" and leave it hanging out there. I find this true so often. I wish there were a TV program entitled WHATEVER HAPPENED _______.
What is so annoying about these types of "reports" is there will never be any follow-up. Reporters throw a "bomb" and leave it hanging out there. I find this true so often. I wish there were a TV program entitled WHATEVER HAPPENED _______.
The news people go for headlines. That's it. Should not a patient or their family have a say who takes care of them? Let's go to the other end of the spectrum. Suppose a person did not want a gay nurses aide taking care of a parent in a nursing home? Whose rights trump whose????
The news people go for headlines. That's it. Should not a patient or their family have a say who takes care of them? Let's go to the other end of the spectrum. Suppose a person did not want a gay nurses aide taking care of a parent in a nursing home? Whose rights trump whose????
Some of you guys just don't seem to get it.
No one is being deprived of any right by being cared for by a nurse of a different race. First of all, there is no right to pick the race, sex, lifestyle of anyone who cares for you in a hospital. Don't like it? Don't go to the hospital.
On the other hand, federal and state laws prohibit hospitals and all businesses from engaging in discrimination based on race, sex, or religion when they hire for staff positions. Now, what would happen if patients or customers had a "right" to say I don't want to be waited on by a Black, a Hispanic, a Greek, a resident of Antrim County in Northern Ireland, a Lithuanian, or a Jewish Woman from Ethiopia. Pretty soon, the laws prohibiting employment discrimination would be useless. It would also be totally unworkable to try and accommodate all these ridiculous preferences that have nothing to do with the quality of treatment provided.
I'm glad the hospital finally stood its ground on this one. Society cannot and should not be run for the benefit of a few misfits like these parents.
How does this work with religious objections to care?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheena12
Actually, the parent had no such right to request any such thing and it is far from a reasonable request as per the Civil Rights Act (1964).
Having worked for my husband in the legal and insurance/ liability field and having worked as an RN for 17 years, I think I have some experience in dealing with this.
The patient also has rights here. And the patient here is an infant child, who has the right to the best care available to him or her. The patient's continuity of care was being disrupted by the fathers unreasonable and fundamentally unfair demands. He was being first and foremost, unfair to his daughter/son, a patient hospitalized in the NICU. He is not a sound judge as to which professional would be best to care for his child. The supervisor has decided this. Interruption of the patient's care, with reckless disregard for said patients well being by a non medical person for arbitrary reasons, would strike me as wanton, and and in disregard of professional decisions.
Had I been the charge nurse, I would have called Child Protective Services. I also would have defended my professional staff. Had the man attempted to remove the baby from the hospital I would have called security and then the police. This would have been my nursing judgement.
What strikes me a sadly ironic, is that for decades, slave owners, followed by racist whites have had no problem permitting their children to be raised by black women, with little or no education but good common sense, judgement and a good heart. At the very least, at least these white people were color blind when it came to the proper care of their children.
Because of the nature of the task, and several other factors, nursing was one of the first professions to open it's doors to black women, where they have served for well over 100 years along with others of all races and rather recently, men.
As a professional, the woman has every right to expect her employer to stand up for her in this situation. She worked hard for her degree and was a specialist in this field. It is both demeaning and degrading for her to be relieved of her duties, from which she most likely derived great satisfaction.
Her employer should have stood by their professional employee and not by the hateful whims of a racist ignoramus and bad parent.
There is no question who is right here. The most wrong part is the hospital in my eyes, because it they they who were the front line in preventing this ignorant bully from running their delivery of care. The most wronged party, in my eyes, was the patient, who had a his care interrupted by an irrational parent. There was a window of opportunity for state officials to step in and to see that this poor excuse for a parent had his own biases and hate filled agenda above that of his own child.
I feel certain that the court will ultimately prevail against this father and I further hope that the hospital is held liable for permitting this idiot from giving care.
For the record, I am not black, I am a WASP and an inactive RN.
Sheena, I'm curious as to how you would treat a religious objection to treatment--such as providing blood to a seriously ill child when the parents object from a religious standpoint? Are you suggesting that the police be called, the child taken into protective custody and given blood products anyway? Would you limit freedom of religion?
I wonder if legally that issue has been resolved.
On the other hand, while I understand this to be a racist motive of this parent that his child only be cared for by a white person, I think the hospital should have the right to provide emergency care only and then to ask the parents to take the child elsewhere.
The hospital is caught in the middle--do whatever is needed to care for the child--or turn a child away (who could possibly die) so that they can fulfill equality issues. It's a moral dilemma that boils down to King Solomon in the OT saying to the two mothers of a child, "Divide him in half and give half to each mother." There is no good answer legally to this situation. And no legislation is in place to provide guidance to the hospital, the parents, the nurses, or the judges.
I'm reminded of the story of Earl Long, brother of Huey Long of Louisiana, who served as governor of Louisiana three times. When a group of black people came to him to complain that about half the patients at Charity Hospital were black but the hospital would not employ black nurses, Earl said, "I'll get the jobs for you, but you won't like how I do it."
He went on a visit to Charity and when taken to the wing housing black patients feigned shock and said, "My God, do you have white nurses taking care of "N"s???? This is an insult to white people." The hospital immediately dismissed a number of white nurses and hired black nurses to care for black patients. A black minister later said of Earl that he understood racism and was able to use it to provide jobs for blacks who were in sore need of the work.
Making simplistic answers to complex problems generally creates more confusion and complexity based on each individual's definition of what is "moral" and what is "right."
If I were sitting on the bench, I would probably declare "no foul" and dismiss the nurses' lawsuit while instructing the hospital to come up with a written guideline to follow in future situations. At least with a written guideline, neither side is faced with a potential last second, life-threatening decision sure to be challenged by someone. Then if someone wants to sue over the written guideline, go for it. There is plenty of time to go to the courts and haggle over saving lives versus protecting equality. A decision made in the heat of the moment was unlikely to have been deliberately racist.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How does this work with religious objections to care?
