Wow, racism alive and well in Flint, MI

[duke0476]

Originally Posted by Bengalzona

Not when it is discrimination.

People used to try to avoid discrimination charges by saying things were "separate but equal". That stuff don't fly no more.

There was no discrimination in the sense of breaking the law. There was racism but not discrimination.

[wildcats forever]

Originally Posted by mallorian69

The article stated the father requested the black nurse not take care of his child, there is no mention of if the child was a newborn or not. NICU isn't just for newborns. Although I have never worked NICU I have heard of babies up to several months old being admitted to NICU. I didn't see any mention of the mother you have to assume that either she wasn't a patient or that the request was only for the care of the child. Since the mother did nothing to counteract the father, by law the hospital had to grant him his request. If a request is made that a certain person or persons are not to be providing care it must be put on the patient's chart. I don't know where the hospital's lawyer got their degree but anything relating to the care of the patient, either positive or negative, is supposed to be in the patient's chart.

In this instance the way it should have been charted is the father's request should have been entered into the chart word for word and any action the staff took in response to his request should have been entered as well. I don't know exactly what the staff said to this guy but it should have went something like this. First they should have asked him to repeat his request so that there would be no way either party could claim one side didn't properly understand the other. Secondly they should have explained to him that it is not standard policy for the hospital to do as he asked and to try to talk him out of it. If he continued to insist that no black staff care for his child he should have been informed that the hospital will grant his request but that by granting his request he could be jeopardizing his child because of a possible shortage of non black qualified staff. All of this would then be entered into the patient's chart.

The article from the OP is seriously short on details but that is understandable due to the confidentiality of medical records and that it involves a minor. Could the hospital have told the father that his child needs to be transferred to a different facility because of his views, possibly. The child was in NICU and it might have been impossible to move the child because the move could have killed it or there were no other NICU's in the area that could properly care for the child. The general public will likely never know exactly what happened but based on what is known the hospital is in no way, shape, or form guilty of anything other than following the law.

Here is a bit more information from another source: http://theoriginalgreenwichdiva.com/...f-child/42665/

".....The lawsuit, which was filed in January, says after the father told the senior nurse about his demands he rolled up his sleeve to reveal a Swastika tattoo.

Battle said she later received a phone call at home telling her that she was reassigned to a different unit. In addition, she said when she returned to work the following day there was a note on the baby’s medical chart saying “Please, no African-American nurses to care for baby per dad’s request.”

About a month later lawyers for the hospital were informed of the note and they quickly demanded it be removed and instructed staff to tell the father they could no longer honor his request.

The lawsuit does not say whether the father removed his child from the hospital."

The lawsuit was filed for racial discrimination. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Bengal Droppings]

Patient Bill of Rights

The Michigan law, MCL 333.20201, known as the Patient Bill of Rights provides that a patient or resident of a health care facility have, at a minimum, the following rights:

To not be denied appropriate care based on race, religion, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, marital status, sexual preference, or source of payment.

http://www.callsam.com/michigan-pers...nt-in-michigan

Doesn't say anything about political affiliation...

To refuse treatment to the extent provided by law and to be informed of the consequences of that refusal. If a refusal of treatment prevents a health facility or agency or its staff from providing appropriate care according to ethical and professional standards, the relationship with the patient or resident may be terminated upon reasonable notice.

Dudes request doesn't seem ethical either...

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by duke0476

No, I am saying it is not grounds for a suit unless there are damages associated with it.

For instance if you claim that you were so mentally damaged that you could no longer work or it affected you so much that you incurred medical bills associated with the incident then you have grounds for a suit.

Having your feelings hurt ***** but is not grounds for a law suit.

You are wrong. You do NOT have to show damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress. With this tort law, all you need to establish are the elements of the law.

The elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress are...

1) that the defendant intended to inflict emotional distress, or that the defendant knew or should have known that emotional distress was the likely result of (his/her) conduct; 2) that the conduct was extreme and outrageous;
3) that the conduct was the cause of emotional distress experienced by the plaintiff; and
4) that the emotional distress sustained by the plaintiff was severe.


That's it, you don't need to show physical damages. If the nurse can get across that the distress was severe that she can't work enough she wins.

If she was still working at the hospital during a reasonable performance, she loses.

It is in her best interest NOT to work at the job.

The chart that said no African-America to work on particular patient is evidence and crucial. Any sign or ducument that says no-xxxx can work on a this or that will be gold for a plaintif and his lawyer. If the hospital staff took the nurse aside and said he doesn't want you then they could have survived, but blatantly having a sign where a nurse can see it was foolish by the staff and it will cost them at the end. I bet the case goes into settlement.

I expect my fees for this consulatation by the end of the month.

[duke0476]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

You are wrong. You do NOT have to show damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress. With this tort law, all you need to establish are the elements of the law.

The elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress are...

1) that the defendant intended to inflict emotional distress, or that the defendant knew or should have known that emotional distress was the likely result of (his/her) conduct; 2) that the conduct was extreme and outrageous;

The defendant in this case is the hospital. There was no intent to cause emotional distress. They were honoring the request of the patients. no different than if the patients did not like or thought their caregivers were incompetent. The conduct was not severe or outrageous, she did not lose any pay, was not disciplined she was simply reassigned.

3) that the conduct was the cause of emotional distress experienced by the plaintiff; and
4) that the emotional distress sustained by the plaintiff was severe.

Again not severe.

That's it, you don't need to show physical damages. If the nurse can get across that the distress was severe that she can't work enough she wins.

This could hold water if she can prove that she is so traumatized that she can't work....but seriously? She could also try to prove that it created a hostile work environment depending on how the hospital handled it.

If she was still working at the hospital during a reasonable performance, she loses.

It is in her best interest NOT to work at the job.

The chart that said no African-America to work on particular patient is evidence and crucial. Any sign or ducument that says no-xxxx can work on a this or that will be gold for a plaintif and his lawyer. If the hospital staff took the nurse aside and said he doesn't want you then they could have survived, but blatantly having a sign where a nurse can see it was foolish by the staff and it will cost them at the end. I bet the case goes into settlement.


I expect my fees for this consulatation by the end of the month.

I agree that this will most likely end with a settlement before trial but I think the hospital has no fault here. The rights of the patient should always come first as long as they can be accommodated.

[fredtoast]

Originally Posted by NashvilleBengalfan

"What's Wrong With Being Sexy?"

"Smell the Glove" is my favorite CD.

[Shady]

The hospital needs to be held accountable. It's not acceptable to bow to racists. And no, everyone doesn't have the right to their own beliefs. Otherwise, we'd tolerate female genital mutilation and other craziness. We just need to have a serious conversation about which beliefs are over the line.

[wildcats forever]

Originally Posted by Shady

The hospital needs to be held accountable. It's not acceptable to bow to racists. And no, everyone doesn't have the right to their own beliefs. Otherwise, we'd tolerate female genital mutilation and other craziness. We just need to have a serious conversation about which beliefs are over the line.

I believe we also need need laws more simply-stated in manners that eliminate semantic warfare.

[Shady]

Originally Posted by wildcats forever

I believe we also need need laws more simply-stated in manners that eliminate semantic warfare.

Agreed. Maybe we need to hold our law schools more accountable for turning out so many idiots who can't write a clear sentence.

[wildcats forever]

Originally Posted by Shady

Agreed. Maybe we need to hold our law schools more accountable for turning out so many idiots who can't write a clear sentence.

It seems like it happens because of the challenge involved, and it generates fees. Finding technicalities/loopholes has funded many law firms over the years. And who benefits, and who suffers?

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by duke0476

I agree that this will most likely end with a settlement before trial but I think the hospital has no fault here. The rights of the patient should always come first as long as they can be accommodated.

Once the staff put out the chart it was game over for the hospital.

[wildcats forever]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Once the staff put out the chart it was game over for the hospital.

This is why I referenced Rosa Parks earlier in the thread. Didn't society learn from this? We simply cannot (and should not) take action against anyone because of the color of their skin. It's a simple concept.

[Shady]

Originally Posted by wildcats forever

It seems like it happens because of the challenge involved, and it generates fees. Finding technicalities/loopholes has funded many law firms over the years. And who benefits, and who suffers?

Why can't it ever be about doing the right thing?

I know, I know. It's the dominant social paradigm's principles of heteronomy and individualism (translate: kiss up and kick down to get ahead).

[Bengalzona]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Once the staff put out the chart it was game over for the hospital.

This is why the hospital's own lawyers order the note removed as soon as they heard. Additionally, they told the father they could no longer honor his request.

[Bengalzona]

Originally Posted by mallorian69

The article stated the father requested the black nurse not take care of his child, there is no mention of if the child was a newborn or not. NICU isn't just for newborns. Although I have never worked NICU I have heard of babies up to several months old being admitted to NICU. I didn't see any mention of the mother you have to assume that either she wasn't a patient or that the request was only for the care of the child. Since the mother did nothing to counteract the father, by law the hospital had to grant him his request. If a request is made that a certain person or persons are not to be providing care it must be put on the patient's chart. I don't know where the hospital's lawyer got their degree but anything relating to the care of the patient, either positive or negative, is supposed to be in the patient's chart.

In this instance the way it should have been charted is the father's request should have been entered into the chart word for word and any action the staff took in response to his request should have been entered as well. I don't know exactly what the staff said to this guy but it should have went something like this. First they should have asked him to repeat his request so that there would be no way either party could claim one side didn't properly understand the other. Secondly they should have explained to him that it is not standard policy for the hospital to do as he asked and to try to talk him out of it. If he continued to insist that no black staff care for his child he should have been informed that the hospital will grant his request but that by granting his request he could be jeopardizing his child because of a possible shortage of non black qualified staff. All of this would then be entered into the patient's chart.

The article from the OP is seriously short on details but that is understandable due to the confidentiality of medical records and that it involves a minor. Could the hospital have told the father that his child needs to be transferred to a different facility because of his views, possibly. The child was in NICU and it might have been impossible to move the child because the move could have killed it or there were no other NICU's in the area that could properly care for the child. The general public will likely never know exactly what happened but based on what is known the hospital is in no way, shape, or form guilty of anything other than following the law.

You bring up some good points, Mal. And I did make an assumption that it was a newborn. I agree details are too few and I respect you experience. However, I disagree about the hospital's liability in honoring this guy's request. Even the hospital's own lawyers see this.

[wildcats forever]

Originally Posted by Shady

Why can't it ever be about doing the right thing?

I know, I know. It's the dominant social paradigm's principles of heteronomy and individualism (translate: kiss up and kick down to get ahead).

Are you allowed to say heteronomy here?

Originally Posted by Bengalzona

This is why the hospital's own lawyers order the note removed as soon as they heard. Additionally, they told the father they could no longer honor his request.

Yep! A settlement is on it's way, and hopefully this is one hospital that may start doing things the right way at the outset.

[Bengalzona]

Originally Posted by wildcats forever

Yep! A settlement is on it's way, and hopefully this is one hospital that may start doing things the right way at the outset.

I can appreciate the confusion on the floor about such a request and I can see the floor staff making the initial decision to honor the request just to get the child in and to start treatment. After all, they are required to care for anyone who comes in, as Mal said. And they clearly wanted to do their jobs regardless of the father's ignorance and moral limitations. But what is damning is that this went on for a month. None of the supervisors took the matter to the hospital's lawyers to check the legality of the request during that time. That was where the problem came.

[wildcats forever]

Originally Posted by Bengalzona

I can appreciate the confusion on the floor about such a request and I can see the floor staff making the initial decision to honor the request just to get the child in and to start treatment. After all, they are required to care for anyone who comes in, as Mal said. And they clearly wanted to do their jobs regardless of the father's ignorance and moral limitations. But what is damning is that this went on for a month. None of the supervisors took the matter to the hospital's lawyers to check the legality of the request during that time. That was where the problem came.

Same here, especially after reading what mallorian wrote regarding patient's rights etc. And I imagine, the staff working the floor aren't as well-versed on all of the legal ramifications as those making judgements after the fact. You're right - the focus on providing care at the moment has to be the driving point. Still, how does a red flag not pop up at the moment in the mind of the staff member who placed the note reflecting the father's request? A call to the administrator and legal department was the proper course of action then, at a minimum.

[duke0476]

Originally Posted by Shady

The hospital needs to be held accountable. It's not acceptable to bow to racists. And no, everyone doesn't have the right to their own beliefs. Otherwise, we'd tolerate female genital mutilation and other craziness. We just need to have a serious conversation about which beliefs are over the line.

That would be a great conversation.

[duke0476]

Originally Posted by wildcats forever

Yep! A settlement is on it's way, and hopefully this is one hospital that may start doing things the right way at the outset.

I hope this goes all the way and the hospital wins. It should be the patients right to choose their medical care period end of story. If the medical staff cannot accommodate that then options should be discussed with the patients. I feel sorry for any patient that gets stuck with medical care they feel is incompetent or otherwise not happy with.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by duke0476

I hope this goes all the way and the hospital wins. It should be the patients right to choose their medical care period end of story. If the medical staff cannot accommodate that then options should be discussed with the patients. I feel sorry for any patient that gets stuck with medical care they feel is incompetent or otherwise not happy with.

You hope the hospial wins??? You are okay with the hospital having the sign out.

Your attitude is why this country is having so much division.

I now know why Blacks want to have their own station BET and their own Miss Black America and Black this and Latino that and Asian this.

I was hoping in my lifetime we would have a color blind society. It should not matter what color the nurse is.

What is so ironic is that if the guy in the hospital pulled that stunt out in Cuba, he would be arrested.
Castro introduced Race laws in Cuba in the 60's and a lot of whites got upset because they had to deal with the Blacks there as equals.
So what did many of them do? They THEN fled Cuba and settled in Miami.


Instead of us having a melting pot you want segregation. Anyone who wants the hospital to win after they put out that sign is a ......

Maybe your username represents David Duke

[jfkbengals]

The dude made the "request" then pulled up his sleeves and showed his tatoos. To me that is threatening the staff. If I were a hospital employee present at that exchange I would have reported it as so and let the ********* be arrested for making threats.

[SunsetBengal]

Originally Posted by jfkbengals

The dude made the "request" then pulled up his sleeves and showed his tatoos. To me that is threatening the staff. If I were a hospital employee present at that exchange I would have reported it as so and let the ********* be arrested for making threats.

Congrats on acknowledging the "implied" threat...

[CKWI88]

Originally Posted by duke0476

I hope this goes all the way and the hospital wins. It should be the patients right to choose their medical care period end of story. If the medical staff cannot accommodate that then options should be discussed with the patients. I feel sorry for any patient that gets stuck with medical care they feel is incompetent or otherwise not happy with.

This goes how far? Age/Sex/Place of Birth/School of Study/Skin color/Eye color/physical beauty/ugliness/height/weight?

[duke0476]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

You hope the hospial wins??? You are okay with the hospital having the sign out.

Your attitude is why this country is having so much division.

I now know why Blacks want to have their own station BET and their own Miss Black America and Black this and Latino that and Asian this.

Instead of us having a melting pot you want segregation. Anyone who wants the hospital to win after they put out that sign is a ......

Maybe your username represents David Duke

Really? I knew someone would overreact eventually and I knew when I saw you post here it would be you.

Where did I imply that I wanted segregation? I am for peoples rights regardless of who they are or what the believe a long as it is not harming anyone. The institution (hospital) did not infringe upon Anyones rights in this case. Like I stated before, had they sent her home, docked her pay or otherwise prevented her from performing her overall duties I would side with her in heartbeat.

I think this family is ignorant and racist but it is still their right to believe what they want and to refuse care if they want.

Don't act like you know me and don't ever call me a racist.