Goth guy initially resfused treatment at Rockyview Hospital

[johnnyrocket03]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I agree that there's always two sides to every story, but the fact that the hospital is so quick to apologize and offer no reasoning for the employee's actions is pretty telling IMO.

Sometimes its just easier to apologize and move on. I dont think the hospital has anything to gain by engaging in a newspaper fight with a patient they have already treated and released.

Or they are completely in the wrong and are acknowledging it.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by johnnyrocket03

Like i said, safety or another practical reason. Im not sure what sort of treatments would be provided for a wrist injury, im also not certain what his wrist injury was: laceration or break/sprain.

This was someone filling out paperwork. There is absolutely no practical reason for removing a necklace while writing down your name and address.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Iginla

Where are the people citing "We've only heard one side of the story"?

The exact words "one side of the story have been used

Originally Posted by ken0042

Once again- we only have one side of the story. The conversation could have gone something like this:

I'd lean to agreeing with ken0042 on this - it's a very slanted argument initially. It's one man's words against nothing. If a third party with no inherent bias says the same thing, then I'd likely agree that the described events. I wouldn't take the father's source as a confirmation as he likely has bias in his viewpoint.

However, the hospital did apologize quickly...meaning they likely know their employee was in the wrong. Not a confirmation in my mind, but a likely possibility.

I'm not sure about hospital front work...I've never talked to any technicians about x-rays, so I wonder if there's any correlation between the x-ray (maybe they thought the injuries were worse than wrist?) and the desire to remove all possible jewellery. It's unlikely as I don't think x-rays are impacted heavily by chest jewellery and there's a very low chance that the employee in question had much control over it or would ask him to remove it at that time (or why they'd order a chest x-ray in the first place), but it's something that I wouldn't question if a finding reported that. They are privy to more details than I am and "skateboarding accident" could mean a wide variety of things. Again, it's likely not the case...but I don't know enough to make a call on this possibility.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by johnnyrocket03

It doesnt matter because that isnt what happened. What's the sense in going over "what if's"?

Because you're ignoring the whole issue at hand, that someone was denied service because of a fashion choice. If the solution is to simply remove the offending element we're going to have a bit of an issue when that element is irremovable.

[macker]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

You should probably work on that, then.

Yep......as mentioned above not entirely right.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDBlqu6KF4k

[macker]

Originally Posted by valo403

Because you're ignoring the whole issue at hand, that someone was denied service because of a fashion choice. If the solution is to simply remove the offending element we're going to have a bit of an issue when that element is irremovable.

Medical staff should be able to have a policy that they won't work on anyone wearing sharp metal objects or any removable accessory. I dont see a problem with this. Maybe this situation wasn't handled properly but how hard is it to remove some of these trinkets anyways.

[johnnyrocket03]

Originally Posted by valo403

Because you're ignoring the whole issue at hand, that someone was denied service because of a fashion choice. If the solution is to simply remove the offending element we're going to have a bit of an issue when that element is irremovable.

He wasnt denied service though, did he not receive the care he required eventually?

My counter "what if" would be: What if he was wearing a shirt that said "F*** n-words" in big bold letters? In that case, would you be all that surprised if the hospital asked him to turn his shirt inside out?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by johnnyrocket03

He wasnt denied service though, did he not receive the care he required eventually?

My counter "what if" would be: What if he was wearing a shirt that said "F*** n-words" in big bold letters? In that case, would you be all that surprised if the hospital asked him to turn his shirt inside out?

It wouldn't surprised me if they asked, it would surprise me greatly if he was denied anything for failing to do so.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by johnnyrocket03

Fair enough but for me personally, I would need to know a bit more context about why it was asked to be removed before i passed judgement on either side.

Just seems dumb to get so enraged over a piece of jewelery, on either side.

I think the context was that he went up to the admitting window and an exchange followed where he was denied service and had to go get admitted by someone else. I also think that his wrist was injured.

Originally Posted by johnnyrocket03

As i said above, for me personally, i would need to know more context before i passed judgement.

If he asked him to remove it for safety or some practical reason then i dont have an issue with it, if he asked him to remove it because of discrimination then its not acceptable but either way i think everyone is getting a little too worked up about it. My opinion is that everyone in general is a little over sensitive these days.

Often I worry about my safety while sitting on a chair, while wearing jewellery, in front of a window with another person on the other side who is taking my information.

Think of what would have happened had he slipped off the chair and his necklace caught on the counter and strangled him before someone else could come rescue him.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by macker

Medical staff should be able to have a policy that they won't work on anyone wearing sharp metal objects or any removable accessory. I dont see a problem with this. Maybe this situation wasn't handled properly but how hard is it to remove some of these trinkets anyways.

Fine, I assume that all of the married members here have been asked to remove their wedding rings upon filling out paperwork at the hospital then if that's the policy. If that's not the case either that policy doesn't exist, or it's being applied in a discriminatory manner.

[Yasa]

Originally Posted by johnnyrocket03

Like i said, safety or another practical reason. Im not sure what sort of treatments would be provided for a wrist injury, im also not certain what his wrist injury was: laceration or break/sprain.

A necklace has nothing to do with the treatment of a wrist injury. It won't be in the way regardless of if it's a laceration or break/sprain. Judging by the photo, it's a sprain.

Originally Posted by macker

Medical staff should be able to have a policy that they won't work on anyone wearing sharp metal objects or any removable accessory. I dont see a problem with this. Maybe this situation wasn't handled properly but how hard is it to remove some of these trinkets anyways.

An inverted cross is not sharp. As for not working on anybody with removable jewellery? Why? So before you go into the ER, you must remove all jewellery? What about the old ladies that come in? Does this count for medicalert bracelets? It's not a problem for EMS, it shouldn't be a problem for hospital staff.

This was the admitting clerk. They sit behind a desk and hand you paper work, ask you some basic questions.

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

when I saw wrist injury I just assumed he cut himself

I thought he was watching old Baywatch DVDs.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by johnnyrocket03

Just seems dumb to get so enraged over a piece of jewelery, on either side.

Ask a Sikh to remove their turban before you serve them and let us know how that works out for you.

The fact that isn't "just" a piece of jewelry isn't the point. This wasn't a matter of safety, this was a matter of "Oh noez that disturbs my fluffy little belief system, please remove it you heathen".

[macker]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Ask a Sikh to remove their turban before you serve them and let us know how that works out for you.

The fact that isn't "just" a piece of jewelry isn't the point. This wasn't a matter of safety, this was a matter of "Oh noez that disturbs my fluffy little belief system, please remove it you heathen".

Herman Bittner?

[Nage Waza]

So what is wrong with upside down crosses? I actually have no idea. Are these people unionized? They may have some sort of workplace policy regarding the right to not be offended...just sayin.

On the other hand, I refused to sell beer to a guy (I worked at a liquor store) because he had a shirt on with a swastika. He left and came back with a sweater on, so I said I wouldn't serve people with sweaters. Then I said if he wanted to complain, I would have the Grim Reapers from the bar come in and explain the rules. The skinhead was peeved and I never saw him come back again. The other guy working with me, a stampede wrestler, was basically standing there cracking his knuckles and letting the guy know he was going to get hurt badly if he didn't leave.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

So what is wrong with upside down crosses? I actually have no idea. Are these people unionized? They may have some sort of workplace policy regarding the right to not be offended...just sayin.

On the other hand, I refused to sell beer to a guy (I worked at a liquor store) because he had a shirt on with a swastika. He left and came back with a sweater on, so I said I wouldn't serve people with sweaters. Then I said if he wanted to complain, I would have the Grim Reapers from the bar come in and explain the rules. The skinhead was peeved and I never saw him come back again. The other guy working with me, a stampede wrestler, was basically standing there cracking his knuckles and letting the guy know he was going to get hurt badly if he didn't leave.

So you're OK with discrimination as long as you disagree with the person being discriminated against. Got it.

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

So what is wrong with upside down crosses? I actually have no idea. Are these people unionized? They may have some sort of workplace policy regarding the right to not be offended...just sayin.

On the other hand, I refused to sell beer to a guy (I worked at a liquor store) because he had a shirt on with a swastika. He left and came back with a sweater on, so I said I wouldn't serve people with sweaters. Then I said if he wanted to complain, I would have the Grim Reapers from the bar come in and explain the rules. The skinhead was peeved and I never saw him come back again. The other guy working with me, a stampede wrestler, was basically standing there cracking his knuckles and letting the guy know he was going to get hurt badly if he didn't leave.

What if he was refused service because he had a star of david necklace? In the situation this guy was in, the clerk can't pick and choose what symbol offends him.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

So you're OK with discrimination as long as you disagree with the person being discriminated against. Got it.

Uhhh, what?

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by Zevo

What if he was refused service because he had a star of david necklace? In the situation this guy was in, the clerk can't pick and choose what symbol offends him.

Uh, the clerk can pick and choose to do anything they want. The question is if it is reasonable. I clearly did not pick what was right or wrong, or are you implying that I did?

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by Zevo

What if he was refused service because he had a star of david necklace? In the situation this guy was in, the clerk can't pick and choose what symbol offends him.

Are you suggesting assorted religious symbols are on the same level as symbols of hate?