So we recently admitted a male patient who identifies himself as female. We don't get many patients like her. A nurse in particular let's his political views get in the way of work and has been calling this patient "it".
Now, let's fast forward to the dilemma. During medication pass, he addressed the patient as "it" out loud and other staff and patients started laughing; next thing you know, we had a behavioral emergency on our hands.
I filled out an incident report because several other nurses and I have spoken to this nurse prior to the event happening. One nurse even brought it up the chain of command. Not only is it unprofessional but it's endangering the safety of others - clearly, it's one of her triggers. Has anyone ever dealt with this type of conduct?
I wouldn't doubt that homosexuals have a higher incidence of being sexually abused as children than hererosexuals. I doubt it's a huge difference, though. And for this theory to make sense, how is it explained that most homosexuals were NOT sexually abused as children? The real explanation for whatever statistical discrepancy does exist is that homosexual children are more vulnerable to sexual abuse than heterosexual children. They are abused because they're homosexual..... they don't become homosexual because they're abused. That's a key distinction.
That's like the argument that homosexuals having higher incidences of psychiatric issues equals proof that homosexuality in and of itself a disorder. When society tells gay people they're "wrong" and evil from childhood, and living a lie or living a double life are the only options, it sort of becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, now doesn't it?
You're entitled to your opinion. But it amuses me that so many heterosexual people think they know what being gay is like better than actual gay people. It is not environmental. People are born gay, or they're not.
And while I'm confident you truly are compassionate toward your gay or TG patients, that doesn't change the fact that the "homosexuality is environmental" claim is offensive, as is the claim that it's a disorder. It's used as a tool to validate the denial of civil liberties to an entire segment of the population. Denying civil liberties to law abiding, tax paying citizens who were born different is clearly wrong. Denying those liberties to people who are mentally disturbed deviants is so much more attractive.
Im not saying you advocate denying anyone their civil rights. But your opinions certainly make it easier for those who do.
brandon your whole response just made me fall in love
So you want to criminalize free speech? I see only speech you disagree with. Should calling someone a homophobe or racist or bigot be against the law? The trouble with a lot of the LGBTQ yes there is a Q now. If you don't agree with their lifestyle choice you need to be punished and publicly humiliated into submission of their group think. It happens on here all the time.
Shouldn't it be? This patient is in our care. The things we say can damage them more so than a smack across a face. Because we cannot visibly see the damage, then it is not just as bad?
So you want to criminalize free speech? I see only speech you disagree with. Should calling someone a homophobe or racist or bigot be against the law? The trouble with a lot of the LGBTQ yes there is a Q now. If you don't agree with their lifestyle choice you need to be punished and publicly humiliated into submission of their group think. It happens on here all the time.
I actually agree with you here.
As a gay male who happens to be black in america( how fun) i can appreciate the right to protest, the right to have an opinion, the right to live however fit. I was born in a country where oppression wasnt based off your color but by your sexuality and social status. There was no/still isnt any progression in regards to having an opinion, you lived our way or your killed.....period.
So fast forward to living in America now, i can truly appreciate those who have the viewpoints that my lifestyle isnt correct. I can appreciate those who think because i am black that i am going to grow up to be some thug or whatever stereotype there is. I can appreciate diversity in all its might.
However, when opinions start to effect another's ability to choose for themselves--- that is a problem. Just cause you dont like my lifestyle, doesnt mean you should force me to live the way you want. that is intrusive and ridiculous.
That's the one thing that bothers me about the GLBTG political agenda. I notice a tendency towards intolerance of others points of view. Red Kryptonite has proven herself on this forum as a reasonable, intelligent poster, not a radical homophobe. She doesn't totally buy into the currently socially acceptable opinion that sexual identity is imprinted in the womb.
Her opinions are seen as a threat to all that is right and good, and contributing to acts of violence and hate.
That strikes me as intellectual intolerance.
All of which is why I went out of my way to make it clear I don't believe she is a homophobe or that she would let this influence the care she provides. I really don't know how I could have made that more clear.
But the stance that homosexuality is a mental disorder, or that it's a side effect of sexual abuse IS harmful and one of the most powerful tools used to legitimize discrimination against gays. It's easier to say gays can't marry or adopt children when they are de facto classified as unstable psych cases who are sexual deviants as a result of sexual abuse as children.
So you want to criminalize free speech? I see only speech you disagree with. Should calling someone a homophobe or racist or bigot be against the law? The trouble with a lot of the LGBTQ yes there is a Q now. If you don't agree with their lifestyle choice you need to be punished and publicly humiliated into submission of their group think. It happens on here all the time.
Verbal abuse is not legally considered part of free speech, and there have been examples where BON's have taken action against nurses who are verbally abusive towards patients based on personal biases against the patient's lifestyle or characteristics, so at least as a nurse it is essentially illegal.
Just to clarify, I don't think Red Kryptonite is engaging in hate speech or really anything disrespectful. Holding differing views on scientific facts, which are either true or false, is different than holding different opinions on those facts, since opinions are not either true or false. You can certainly have incorrect understanding of the science underlying gender/sex development and not be hateful towards others, but that same misunderstanding is often the basis of hate, so it's certainly worth debating what is actually true so that we're not feeding that hate with false information.
At one time it was common practice to surgically alter infants at birth who were born with ambiguous or otherwise abnormal genitalia, most often surgically creating 'normal' female genitalia since it's the easiest to construct with whatever is available. Since it was thought at the time that a newborn's gender identity is essentially a blank slate they could be raised as either gender without any issues, particularly in cases where the internal organs now matched the external genitalia. As it turned out, that was wrong, a huge number of these patients grew up wondering why they didn't feel like the gender their external genitalia suggested. A NEJM study looked at over 1000 of these patients and found that a person's gender identity cannot be determined solely by environmental factors and socialization. As a result of these observations, such assignments at birth in the case of ambiguity are no longer recommended. The current practice is to allow the child to eventually express the gender their brain tells them they are and adjust the external genitalia accordingly if they wish which is the basic premise of TG surgery.
So you want to criminalize free speech? I see only speech you disagree with. Should calling someone a homophobe or racist or bigot be against the law? The trouble with a lot of the LGBTQ yes there is a Q now. If you don't agree with their lifestyle choice you need to be punished and publicly humiliated into submission of their group think. It happens on here all the time.
I don't think that anyone wants to criminalize free speech. As I understood brandiep, her post was a comment on (and perhaps an emotional response to) the fact that a nurse called a patient it. While I agree with you that this shouldn't be a criminal offence, it certainly makes me question that nurse's level of professionalism and qualities as a human being.
I don't think it's appropriate to use free speech as an excuse to violate nursing ethics and normal decent behavior. Surely you're not arguing that calling a patient "it" is acceptable?
Actually, there are people, left winged, 'open-minded ' folk, who do seem intent on shutting down free expression of opinion. They'd like to see the likes of Rush Limbaugh (I loath the guy, btw) off the air.
Actually, there are people, left winged, 'open-minded ' folk, who do seem intent on shutting down free expression of opinion. They'd like to see the likes of Rush Limbaugh (I loath the guy, btw) off the air.
I'd love to see him off the air. Not forced off the air by the FCC or anything, just failing miserably and getting cancelled.
At one time it was common practice to surgically alter infants at birth who were born with ambiguous or otherwise abnormal genitalia, most often surgically creating 'normal' female genitalia since it's the easiest to construct with whatever is available. Since it was thought at the time that a newborn's gender identity is essentially a blank slate they could be raised as either gender without any issues, particularly in cases where the internal organs now matched the external genitalia. As it turned out, that was wrong, a huge number of these patients grew up wondering why they didn't feel like the gender their external genitalia suggested. A NEJM study looked at over 1000 of these patients and found that a person's gender identity cannot be determined solely by environmental factors and socialization. As a result of these observations, such assignments at birth in the case of ambiguity are no longer recommended. The current practice is to allow the child to eventually express the gender their brain tells them they are and adjust the external genitalia accordingly if they wish which is the basic premise of TG surgery.
The blank slate theory was surely dis-proven by the experimentation of Dr. John Money of Johns Hopkins University.
A very sad tale of the Canadian twins where one was mutilated during the circumcision and forced into a sexual reassignment. Dr. Money believed gender was totally environmental and counseled the parents to convince the child that he was a girl but of course he knew better and fought it. When he found out the truth he tried another gender reassignment which was not successful either. A not totally unexpected suicide followed. The other twin suffered from schizophrenia and also committed suicide.
I think that had a significant impact on the assumption that the medical community knows better and to allow the child to express themselves before "treating" with surgery or hormones.
call the cops when someone calls a gay person an "it" and let me know what they say to you. I bet you go to jail for abusing the 911 system.
Verbal abuse is not legally considered part of free speech, and there have been examples where BON's have taken action against nurses who are verbally abusive towards patients based on personal biases against the patient's lifestyle or characteristics, so at least as a nurse it is essentially illegal.
Just to clarify, I don't think Red Kryptonite is engaging in hate speech or really anything disrespectful. Holding differing views on scientific facts, which are either true or false, is different than holding different opinions on those facts, since opinions are not either true or false. You can certainly have incorrect understanding of the science underlying gender/sex development and not be hateful towards others, but that same misunderstanding is often the basis of hate, so it's certainly worth debating what is actually true so that we're not feeding that hate with false information.
OnlinePersona, LPN
352 Posts
brandon your whole response just made me fall in love
totally right on.