Some patients won't see nurses of different race

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Not only that , it is ILLEGAL for a provider to treat a patient who refuses treatment for WHATEVER reason! For good reason I might add!

It is also illegal to REFUSE to treat a patient who requests treatment for other than safety reasons. Safety of the staff trumps everything.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
It's not about the staff's feelings. It's about the fact that they offered competent care. Unless you can show me a qualification or a performance issue with that person, I would not allow a change based on bigotry. I just wouldn't allow it.

I'm not sure that I would even allow a change based on sex...as English Lady mentioned. It is a professional environment and duties should be assigned by qualifications and performance...nothing else.
I agree with you in the abstract, but I've witnessed up close and personal how added stress can affect someone's recovery.

If, for example, you break a bone, all of your body's excess energy needs to be directed to healing that fracture. The less external stress you are subjected to, be it physical or emotional, the quicker and more completely you will heal. If you are healing from something more serious, like recovering from cancer surgery and also dealing with fighting an infection at the same time, being free of external stress becomes not only more important, but critical to whether you live or die. If you force someone to incur added external stress in such a situation, you are literally doing them harm, and you may even kill them. And that's why hospitals are so quick to grant such requests.

Doctors, nurses and hospitals in general have seen it. They can see it right there on the monitor that shows a patient's vital signs, where heartbeat and other signs can change dramatically, for the worse, when someone the patient is uncomfortable with enters the room. Even a modest increase in heart rate can be harmful to the patient, because it is an indicator of stress, and stress in the wrong situation can be detrimental, even fatal, to the patient's recovery. The Hippocratic Oath demands that Political Correctness play no part in the care of a patient.
 

AMonger

Veteran Expediter
The patient is, and should be, 100% in control of their care.
I can tell someone hasn't been reading the news for the last few years. The patient isn't in control of much. Actually, the doctors are in control of frighteningly little. Guess who is... It's even worse in the EU, and that's where we're headed, if Comrade Obama completes his agenda.

As far as the nurse goes, did she get paid? That she wasn't able to care for that patient didn't affect her paycheck, did it? If I get the same paycheck for doing less work, seems to me that's a pretty good deal, and I don't care why/how it happened. I go to work solely for the paycheck, and that's what matters.
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
Personally...if it's my life...or a loved one's life on the line.... I couldn't care less what somebody's skin color is. I want to know who is best with that particular condition. It would be really stupid and dangerous to refuse treatment from a well qualified and proven provider because of their race...or sex... only to be treated by somebody less qualified. I just don't get the bigotry of it...at all.

That's you. Some people's instincts are different than yours. Some beliefs are different. Bigoted or not, that is not the call of someone fulfilling the service. The customer is always right in what they want, since they are paying. If one hospital can not provide it, there are others that can.

Now one thing that can kill this argument is that affirmative action has allowed for minorities to not have to do as well as other races in their training. When one goes under the knife of a minority surgeon, he is not knowing if the person is truly good at their craft, or is a recipient of occupational welfare. Such is a valid issue, not that I necessarily agree with it. There are doctors who are great studies, who are crap in action. There are nurses who graduate at the top of their class, and have a terrible bedside manner. We traded in our white female pediatrician for a black man, because he was better in our opinion. But I can understand there may be some anxiety of having a caregiver of a certain sex, race, or religion, because, as so many have pointed out, it is human nature. If you try to legislate human nature, as we are doing in so many other areas, you are playing with some serious fire.
 

paullud

Veteran Expediter
To bad our country's system is so screwed up that they didn't just tell the nurses to shove it. How did not treating the racist father's baby hurt them? There was nothing done beyond some crybabies with hurt feelings so I'm not sure why they would get to sue. If someone wants to be an idiot let them, especially when it involves something personal like healthcare. If the nurses actually cared more about the patient than themselves then they wouldn't worry about the request and would just move on to the next patient.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Maybe they are suing looking for a fat payday to retire? This is an article about Detroit after all. The entitlement capitol of the country!
 

aristotle

Veteran Expediter
This has been a pretty good thread, good questions for the most part, kinda fun!

This is an interesting thread. My wife has been a BSN/RN for 25 years. Putting a patient at ease is unquestionably the best thing to do. We don't have to like it or understand it. If obtaining the optimal outcome in patient care is the objective, catering to the vulnerable and ill makes sense. Patient and staff should not be in an adversarial relationship.
 

Rocketman

Veteran Expediter
The customer is always right in what they want, since they are paying. If one hospital can not provide it, there are others that can.
But... that is my point. The hospital did not refuse care..they offered care. The care offered was refused...tough! Don't let the door ya on the way out.

What if the hospital was staffed by 100% non-whites? Whatta ya do now?
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
But... that is my point. The hospital did not refuse care..they offered care. The care offered was refused...tough! Don't let the door ya on the way out.

What if the hospital was staffed by 100% non-whites? Whatta ya do now?


They would either accept the care or move on.

I suggest you, if there is a way to do it, watch some BP and heart rate monitors when they are on a patient. ANYTHING can set them off. The greater the illness/injury, the more likely it is to affect them

That is why we NEVER used the siren when we had a patient on board the ambulance. We seldom used it when coming onto the scene and only when it was needed for safety reasons. Just a SOUND can send the heart and BP into a tizzy. That can kill.

Now, if that baby DIES because of the actions of the father, it would be the father who should face charges.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
I'm really surprised to read that this is an 'open secret' in hospitals, because in nearly 10 years of nursing in a major hospital, I never once heard of it. The only objections we encountered were to the opposite gender, based upon religious and/or cultural grounds, and those we honored, same as religious dietary requests.
If the decision were in my hands, I'd agree to honor the patient's wishes, as far as practically possible. Meaning they may have to wait for the choice to be available - but it's certainly up to them.
If it's ok to reject a caregiver for their skin color, where's the line? Can patients require that 'no Irish need apply'? Can they reject a nurse who is Muslim, or Jewish?
That stress is harmful is a given, but hospitals & staff need only go to reasonable lengths to avoid it - they don't, for example, prohibit doctors from ordering the patient be awakened during the night for procedures [phlebotomy] and medications that could be done just as effectively in the morning.

PS In this particular case, the complainant is the father of the patient: his newborn. Who most likely couldn't have cared less what color skin cared for him, and would have no additional stress on that account.
:rolleyes:
PPS The original Hippocratic Oath has been abandoned, [maybe because it required free education for doctors?] and a more modern version is used. In it, I find the following to be relevant:


I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

"All my fellow human beings" seems to cover the essence of 'politically correct', and it's right in there in the oath.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I don't know about the "open secret" bit either. I think it is more a few people looking to stir up as much trouble as they can. It's Detroit. That is what they do there in place of work. That particular case would be SO RARE I cannot even imagine.

NOW, women refusing a male staff is FAR more likely, even more likely than a man refusing female staff, although both do happen.

As to stress in treatment, watched the BP and heart rates to wild and crazy things on my rigs. I think I would ALWAYS error on the side of the patient no matter how stupid they are.

We also used to just wait till they passed out and THEN treat them. They were likely not competent prior to crashing to refuse treatment anyway. Big difference when out in the field with the 'freshly' wounded or ill. Then there are the "wack jobs" you run into. Some of them were even funny!

One was crazy. She had a knife and was talking suicide. She was going to kill anyone who came near her. Mrs. Layoutshooter was able to go into the house, calm her down, and get the knife from her. All she did was agree that the woman's husband, and men in general, were pigs, the woman calmed down and could then get her into the rig. If WE had FORCED our way in it would have likely ended in a different manner.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Tennesseehawk: your statement about affirmative action meaning that minorities don't have to perform as well in their training - can you point to a source?
I've heard that minorities get advanced in the admittance queu, but in performance during training? I believe [and sure as heLL hope!] that's incorrect. Because it's definitely wrong.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Tennesseehawk: your statement about affirmative action meaning that minorities don't have to perform as well in their training - can you point to a source?
I've heard that minorities get advanced in the admittance queu, but in performance during training? I believe [and sure as heLL hope!] that's incorrect. Because it's definitely wrong.


I don't know about the medical field but the military makes multiple exceptions for women. They are NOT required to perform strength wise with the men, which is TOTALLY wrong. If they want to play with the big boys they should have to meet the big boy standards or go home. Lives are at stake. The men's standards have already been LOWERED compared to when I was in and the women's are even lower. NOT GOOD! As to other minorities in the military, don't know. All the men had equal requirements.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
I don't know about the medical field but the military makes multiple exceptions for women. They are NOT required to perform strength wise with the men, which is TOTALLY wrong. If they want to play with the big boys they should have to meet the big boy standards or go home. Lives are at stake. The men's standards have already been LOWERED compared to when I was in and the women's are even lower. NOT GOOD! As to other minorities in the military, don't know. All the men had equal requirements.

100% irrelevant.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
I'm really surprised to read that this is an 'open secret' in hospitals, because in nearly 10 years of nursing in a major hospital, I never once heard of it. The only objections we encountered were to the opposite gender, based upon religious and/or cultural grounds, and those we honored, same as religious dietary requests.
How can you state that you have never once heard of it, and then in the same paragraph show examples of where you actually encountered it? :D

PS In this particular case, the complainant is the father of the patient: his newborn. Who most likely couldn't have cared less what color skin cared for him, and would have no additional stress on that account.:rolleyes:
I agree with you there. I think the father was out of line in making the request, and unless the baby could not be moved to another hospital because of a medical condition, then the hospital shouldn't have granted the request.

PPS The original Hippocratic Oath has been abandoned, [maybe because it required free education for doctors?] and a more modern version is used.
Of the various editions of the oaths given today in the US and Canada, only 14 percent of them expressly prohibit euthanasia, 11 percent hold covenant with a deity, 8 percent prohibit abortion, and a paltry 3 percent forbid sexual contact with patients - all of which are maxims held sacred in the classical version of the oath.

The original Hippocratic Oath is largely inadequate to address the realities of a medical world that has seen huge scientific, economic, political, and social changes, a world of legalized abortion, physician-assisted suicide, and pestilences unheard of in Hippocrates' time. In an environment of increasing medical specialization, should physicians of such different stripes swear to a single one-size-fits-all oath? With governments and health-care organizations demanding patient information as never before, how can a doctor maintain a patient's privacy, which the original oath demands? Are physicians morally and ethically obligated to treat patients with such lethal new diseases as the Ebola virus? AIDS? Hemorrhagic Fever?

The AMA Code of Ethics covers a lot of it, though.

Incidentally, there is no legal obligation for a medical student to swear to an oath upon graduation on becoming a doctor. More than 99 percent of US doctors do, but some don't, which kinda makes you want to know if your doctor is one of the one percent. Only about 50% of doctors in England have sworn the Oath.
 

Rocketman

Veteran Expediter
In a free country one is allowed to be an idiot, no matter how stupid that is.
No doubt. I agree 100%. He was given his freedom to make a choice. At which time, if I were the administrator, I would have communicated to him his remaining options....NONE of which would involve removing the nurse based on the color of her skin.
 
Top