In 2013, in one of the most progressive counties in the state of Florida, it is top secret that racial and religious discrimination is practiced in many, if not most, hospitals. It seems hard to believe, but when black or other minor hospital staff report discrimination to management, they find that there is a quiet, non-public policy that allows racial and religious discrimination. The policy can be found in what the officials call the "directorate for the hospital."
“How could this be,” you may wonder? Imagine a sign on duty in the delivery room, which says: "African-American nurses do not care for a child, please dad."
Paradoxically, such discrimination is justified as part of the “rights of patients”.
A front-page story about discrimination in hospitals designed to protect the rights of patients quotes administrators who defended policies as needed “for proper patient care.” The black nurse who got out of caring for the patient asked, “What about my rights?” The answer is that her rights were subordinated to the hospital administration to agree with the fanatics who demanded that no black person should participate in their treatment or treatment.
I found it awesome. In Mississippi or Alabama, I could believe it. Perhaps it could be Georgia, South Carolina or Texas. But florida? Pinellas County? Quell the horror!
This is reminiscent of the comment of the late Christopher Hitchens in Hitch-22: Memoirs: “The only thing that a racist can never cope with is something like discrimination: he is by definition discrimination.”
How does it happen that in some hospitals in Florida there is an unwritten policy that protects the rights of fanatics to participate in racial discrimination or for reasons related to religious beliefs? I will not do this - you can read the history of such “rights” in the article by Weston Phippen. This article is titled: “Hospitals Balance Patience and a Fair Workplace” in the Tampa Bay Times on November 10, 2013.
One black nurse who did not want to subordinate her rights to those who suffered from a fanatical white patient filed a discrimination lawsuit in a district court in Tampa. Ms. Sirentia Dysart claimed that the “open secret” directive at the Palmes Pasadena hospital in St. Petersburg violated her right to be free from discrimination. No case is expected. In Michigan, a similar case was brought out of court - after hospital officials apologized, they pledged to discontinue the practice and paid the nurse $ 200,000.
Although patients have rights, such as refusal of medical care, informed consent and refusal of care for any reason, the hospital and the staff who work there also have rights. A law professor mentioned in The Times History said that if a patient puts an unreasonable burden on the hospital, the object can advise the patient that he cannot accept the discriminatory request. He can then arrange for the patient to be transferred to another facility if the patient can be moved.
In a nationwide survey of 127 doctors at the University of Chicago, 20% reported having experienced "complaints of race or religion" from patients. “Accounting” showed that when a patient and a doctor have the same race, on average, the visits were more than two minutes longer, and the patient was more satisfied with the care. ”
I say “too bad” to have shorter visits and less patient satisfaction than to take into account racial, religious, or other prejudices. Sometimes the best results of patients would also accompany greater tolerance if fanatical patients received lessons in the rights of all people. Sometimes the hospital Bill of Rights provided to all patients upon admission must include this observation of Jarod Kinz: "I accept all people, even people whom I consider unacceptable." Let all patients know that they are expected to do the same.
Good wishes and stay at the hotel.
