Unions protest 100m hospital donation

[mhy12784]

http://nypost.com/2014/03/11/those-evil-koch-brothers/

This pretty much sums it all up

This awful businessman has given $100 million to help New York-Presbyterian Hospital build a state-of-the-art ambulatory care center.

Most New Yorkers likely regard such a donation as a tremendous act of charity. Not the New York State Nurses Association, SEIU Local 1199, the New York State NAACP or the Working Families Party. On Saturday, they protested outside both the hospital and David Koch's apartment.

I understand that politics is jaded, and people are crazy and bitter. But this is absurd. If someone that I politically hated (im not really political but still) donated to 100million to my hospital id probably say something wild and crazy like "thank you" to them, instead of protesting them.

But I guess im just nuts

Sad that one of NYs largest nursing unions was protesting 100m that would be adding to their jobs and quality of healthcare provided.

[iluvgusgus]

In response to the OP, yes, I would oppose a tobacco company donating 100 mil to build a hospital because they are causing the premature deaths of millions of Americans and should not be selling cigarettes anymore, period. And 100 mil would probably be a very small percentage compared to their net profit in one year.

[mhy12784]

What makes you think the hospital will serve those without access to quality healthcare?

FYI because you don't know **** about them:

The Real Welfare Queens - In These Times

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTwqkl8BqSc

because virtually all not for profit hospitals (which NYP is) serve those without access to quality healthcare.

Even the big fancy hospitals do. Hospitals are limited in how many "freebies" they can afford to give out while still operating efficiently, but they help the unfortunate.

And someone donating 100m to a hospital also helps the millions of people who HAVE health insurance. By providing them with better quality of care.

So its a win win

And that article is pretty pointless. They received a whopping 88 million in subsidies !?!? This is a company that earns billions, and these guys just donated 100 million (which is more than the 88 million in subsidies) to a hospital.

If people think government subsidies are a bad thing, they should be protesting the government. Also how many subsides/special government treatment do you think these unions protesting are getting ? Hint- A LOT

[Overland1, RN]

... New York Post, what a yellow paper!

Exactly.

When I want real news, I turn to The Daily Show, The Huffington Post, and the Daily Kos.

[jadelpn, LPN, EMT-B]

But here's the thing--if a women goes to this ambulatory care center and is seeking birth control, chances are this won't be on the agenda of the plan of care. If same woman comes back because she is now pregnant, again, chances are that pregnancy termination will not be either. So then we have a woman without choices, and a child who potentially suffers because of it.

These kind of donators seek out pushing their own political agenda in area where a large majority of patients would be under-served. This way, they are in a position of power and control, as for the patient there's little other choice.

[bloodorange]

OK, let's be real, NYP is a huge not-for-profit system that isn't going to start changing their care strategies because of a big donor. NYC is full of "big donors." The Kochs are just extra repugnant, that's all. I think it's good to remember just how repugnant they are, and not to immediately pat them on the back "because charity!"

[jadelpn, LPN, EMT-B]

OK, let's be real, NYP is a huge not-for-profit system that isn't going to start changing their care strategies because of a big donor. NYC is full of "big donors." The Kochs are just extra repugnant, that's all. I think it's good to remember just how repugnant they are, and not to immediately pat them on the back "because charity!"

But for 100 million "without strings" ?(

[mhy12784]

But for 100 million "without strings" ?(

A hospital would start denying patients birth control because of a donor ?

Cmon now

This isnt the 1930s

[Mindful, RN]

... I have a bridge in N.Y. for sale.

[mhy12784]

... I have a bridge in N.Y. for sale.

Just dont donate the proceeds to a hospital. People might protest outside your house

[subee, MSN, CRNA]

What's sad is that either Koch brother is permitted to serve on the Board of NYP. Their policy of freedom to pollute our waters has caused cancer among people who have to live near these waters. NOTHING they do is motivated by charity. And,IMHO, it's creepy that any member of a hospital board would be allowed to give a donation while serving on that board.

[monkeybug]

But here's the thing--if a women goes to this ambulatory care center and is seeking birth control, chances are this won't be on the agenda of the plan of care. If same woman comes back because she is now pregnant, again, chances are that pregnancy termination will not be either. So then we have a woman without choices, and a child who potentially suffers because of it.

These kind of donators seek out pushing their own political agenda in area where a large majority of patients would be under-served. This way, they are in a position of power and control, as for the patient there's little other choice.

I find it difficult to believe that this hospital is the only place a woman can go in NYC to get rid of her "little problem." I'm in a smallish city in the south, and we even have an abortionist. He's quite a charmer, too, one of the most repulsive individuals I've ever had the misfortune to meet. When the Koch brothers are marching into Planned Parenthood and dragging women out of the stirrups by the hair, then I might understand how them giving money to this hospital is limiting women's rights. So the woman has to go to the health department or PP to get her condoms or pills after she gets a cut sutured here. The options are there, just not there. Why is it such a heinous intrusion on a woman if she can't kill her baby in one locale but can in another? Abortions aren't done in any of the ambulatory care centers here, either, thankfully.

[toomuchbaloney]

I find it difficult to believe that this hospital is the only place a woman can go in NYC to get rid of her "little problem." I'm in a smallish city in the south, and we even have an abortionist. He's quite a charmer, too, one of the most repulsive individuals I've ever had the misfortune to meet. When the Koch brothers are marching into Planned Parenthood and dragging women out of the stirrups by the hair, then I might understand how them giving money to this hospital is limiting women's rights. So the woman has to go to the health department or PP to get her condoms or pills after she gets a cut sutured here. The options are there, just not there. Why is it such a heinous intrusion on a woman if she can't kill her baby in one locale but can in another? Abortions aren't done in any of the ambulatory care centers here, either, thankfully.

You are free to dislike abortion and to choose not to complete one.

Not every American shares your Christian belief system which prohibits exercising of that right.

Many of us are concerned about the ongoing erosion of women's reproductive health rights in this country. We are concerned that legislators (generally older white men) are clamoring to make abortion unavailable in their geographic region for many poor women. Along with the disappearance of abortion clinics is the disappearance of clinics which provide reproductive health care to those very same women. Please review what is happening in Texas as example.

At the same time, the SCOTUS is deciding whether or not your employer may decide for you which birth control will be paid for by your health insurance. that is, apparently because it violates the religious beliefs of the company. (what church does your company attend?) Which personal thing will they get to decide for you next based upon their "religion" or faith system (does capitalism count as a religious or faith system)?