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.
Thank you for an educated answer. People that have not worked for the public for years have no understanding of the tightrope walking public servants do on a daily basis. Yes, there were many time when I could have said "poor little me" and sued but out of respect for the place you work, you do not do it IF YOU ARE A PROFESSIONAL. You work together with the rest of the staff to make a team and comfort each other in the back room. It was already established early in the thread that this hospital was not a racist environment. Amazing how people want to twist things for their own agenda. Sounds to me like the situation was handled in a very professional manner for the betterment of everybody involved. And no I do not think the supervisor should be fired. People with good judgment are hard to find and she had very good judgment about the situation.
This lawsuit is nothing beside of the suit they could have had if the baby had died after the parents request had been denied. The employee was protected from a law suit and the patient was reassured.
The supervisor ignored the Civil Rights Act and acted improperly and should have been fired. Hospitals have protocols regarding unreasonable patient and demands, and she failed to do the right thing.
If this request had been made at one of the hospitals where I have worked it would have been handled like this: the supervisor would have asked the father to have a seat in the small private family waitng area and then she would have gone to her office and called the hospital administrator. She would have briefed him on the situation and he would would have come down to speak with the man privately. He would have cited hospital policy and assured the father that all of the nurses were highly qualified.
Most likely a call would have gone out on the hospital radio system to alert security to "a possible 99 on the third floor" which meant security plus selected other employees were alerted to the fact that an incident couldbe developing, and that they should stand by.
In almost 20 years in the medical field I have seen several requests for non-smoking nurses, which are granted, if possible, but the patient is told the request will be honored IF possible. I have seen requests for female nurses, which is no problem to honor because most nurses are female. I have never seen a request for a certain race but it would not have been honored because that is racial discrimination.
Are you saying that it's not uncommon for patients to request that caregivers be a particular race?
What is uncommon?
I've seen it quite a few times. I have gotten the race and gender a lot. A lot meaning to me about 20 times a year for the race. Gender is hit or miss. But that may not be a lot and I deal with the geriatric population so it is not a surprise.
When we get a racial request we politely infirm them there is no way in hell we will be doing that. Staff members may trade patients if they choose and many do but we (the facility) take no part in that.
I tend to ignore the gender bit. Even I have gender preferences. Outside of emergencies of course.
Any other request that doesn't affect care is generally honored. We honor all religious requests as well.
Patients are not allowed to dictate their entire medical treatment and you know that. A hospital patient can't demand a six pack of beer every day during his hospitalization or the right to smoke in his room.
The medical profession should--within reason--attempt to make patients comfortable. The whole point that you and a couple of others don't seem to get is that a request to have healthcare provided only by people of a particular race is not a reasonable request. It doesn't pertain to safety. It doesn't pertain to skill. Unlike a woman's request to be seen by a woman doctor it has nothing to do with modesty either. (I find that request questionable, but I don't put it in the same category as one that is based purely on race)
Do you think the hospital ought to simply ignore Title VII of the Civil Rights Act?
What would you think if hospitals got away with this sort of thing, if supervisors slowly stopped hiring black nurses and staff because they didn't want to be in this position again?
What other requests by patients do you think ought to be granted? I've mentioned the ones involving drinking beer and smoking cigarettes? How about continuing their illegal drug habits? After all, you seem to think we should ignore Civil Rights laws so that we can make a patient more comfortable.
I think you are confusing the notion of acting within reason to make a patient feel more at ease with the notion of giving them everything they want. I know there are some supervisors in the work world who try to do that sort of thing. They are mistaken.
I'm starting to understand just why its been so hard for blacks and other minorities to achieve something close to equality of rights in this country. Attitudes like this continue to hold some of them back.
I think a law suit like this would contribute more to holding them back. Some do not want to deal with having to watch their every move so as not to offend a very sensitive minority person. Where I worked we all took turns cleaning up our work area. It was never one black girls turn and we asked about it. She told management it was not in her work description. They let her get away with it because they were concerned she might sue.
I've seen it quite a few times. I have gotten the race and gender a lot. A lot meaning to me about 20 times a year for the race. Gender is hit or miss. But that may not be a lot and I deal with the geriatric population so it is not a surprise.
When we get a racial request we politely infirm them there is no way in hell we will be doing that. Staff members may trade patients if they choose and many do but we (the facility) take no part in that.
I tend to ignore the gender bit. Even I have gender preferences. Outside of emergencies of course.
Any other request that doesn't affect care is generally honored. We honor all religious requests as well.
So what if this was the very first time that this supervisor had to deal with a request based on race?
Again, why does a situation with a black worker always have to end in a lawsuit? And when it does, all it means to me is that the black worker is hoping for a cash settlement... and that smacks of greed much more than it does hurt feelings.
Probably because of racist stereotypes like this???
But how is paying that black nurse a cash settlement solving anything? I don't think that the hospital did anything awful to this black nurse. The only person in this situation that was the problem was the man with the tattoo that made the request. He is the ONLY person that was racist in this case, not the hospital or the supervisor.
And the hospital paying money out to the black nurse is NOT punishing the man with the tattoo. And because the money will be coming out of the hospital's budget, in the big picture, it's NOT solving racism, but making healthcare for everyone else later on more expensive. And it's also rewarding ambulance chasing lawyer types.
The only thing that you can accuse the supervisor of is being colour-aware, rather than being colour-blind. The supervisor in assigning the black nurse to other patients instead in no way suggested that the black nurse's work was sub par. The supervisor and the hospital are clearly NOT racist. And it should be enough for that black nurse if every hospital in the US implements training to their staff so that this situation never repeats itself.
Question: Once the request is made for a non-AA nurse, is the supervisor then obligated to assign an AA nurse to the patient in order to avoid any appearance of complying with the father's demand? What if the supervisor had quietly assigned another nurse without leaving notes or explaining her reasoning?
The consensus seems to be that patient requests based on gender or religious preference should be honored when possible, but racial preferences should never be honored. However, under the Civil Rights Act these are all protected classes. Should the Act be revised?
I think, as innocent as it is, you guys are missing the point. IN medicine, we are taught NOT TO PASS JUDGEMENT OR ACT SURPRISED BY ANYTHING OUR PATIENTS NEED!!!
I have seens some STRANGE stuff in my day, but you are to keep a straight face (no matter how hard), not look shocked or even frightened (altho I HAVE been by some of the stuff I have seen/heard) and render care to the best of your ability for the good of the patient....have I seen folks of a "different persuasion" than me get sexual toys with batteries included stuck in their anus....YES. Do people with certain "desires/needs" make you wonder WTH???? on a regular basis...YES! But your JOB, as a health care professional is to say, "treat the patient as best you can to meet their needs making them as comfortable as possible" and do your JOB. Now, if the lady had lost wages, job or position, no issues. But in this day and age, if someone stupid enough (and yes, passing judgement because I am NOT rendering health care) to have a antisemetic tatoo on their body asks me to take a black or jewish care giver off the case), I would do so in a NY second to protect both the caregivers from any and all false accusations AND to render the care that was requested based on their belief/thoughts...regardless of how "warped" I personally find them.
People ARE crazy....and the thought of a situation being created that can be avoided in a health care facility should be the #1 priority...keep EVERYONE safe.
I agree. And people who are comparing actual treatment to TV stations in the waiting room and billing complaints are missing the point - which is that actual treatment is unique because it requires physical contact, often in intimate areas, as well as nudity. It's a whole 'nother ballgame to take your clothes off and be touched than having to watch TV you don't like. I had an x-ray tech make me very uncomfortable once, a doctor who gave me a pelvic who just creeped me out, etc... I should be able to say I don't want to be treated by people because it makes me uncomfortable without having to explain my reasons or have to get them approved by anyone.
But how is paying that black nurse a cash settlement solving anything? I don't think that the hospital did anything awful to this black nurse. The only person in this situation that was the problem was the man with the tattoo that made the request. He is the ONLY person that was racist in this case, not the hospital or the supervisor.
That is for the court to decide. The nurse has not won anything yet unless I am mistaken.
Quote:
And the hospital paying money out to the black nurse is NOT punishing the man with the tattoo. And because the money will be coming out of the hospital's budget, in the big picture, it's NOT solving racism, but making healthcare for everyone else later on more expensive. And it's also rewarding ambulance chasing lawyer types.
Irrelevant. If the court finds the hospital liable then they pay.
However, unless the nurse shows some form of financial damages she will let nothing methinks.
There is no pattern, no hostile work environment, no nothing.
Quote:
The only thing that you can accuse the supervisor of is being colour-aware, rather than being colour-blind. The supervisor in assigning the black nurse to other patients instead in no way suggested that the black nurse's work was sub par. The supervisor and the hospital are clearly NOT racist.
Not clearly. A non racist would never tolerate racist behavior in their business. however, I don't believe the hospital will be held liable for anything.
Quote:
And it should be enough for that black nurse if every hospital in the US implements training to their staff so that this situation never repeats itself.
Why should it be enough? Are you on the "it should be enough" committee?
When were the elections for that???
I think you are getting way to worked up over nothing.
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.
