It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nurse suspended for prayer offer

page: 5
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by wayno
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 



The patient also has to be tolerant don't you think? I'm not religious and yet i would have tolerated it and i can tell you the simple reason. I don't buy into all this political correctness.

You could tolerate it, I could tolerate it, but this woman felt it was inappropriate. Why can't you deal with that?
She has a right to her feelings. Not everyone has to be the same.
I defend her right to feel however she wants to about this issue. Its her home, and her life.


Go check further up because i said i support her right to be offended. I am however commenting on the fact that society has become remarkably thin skinned. I'm just not sure someone should get fired for something like this. Whilst i understand she will have to be disciplined as there are rules in place i am just wondering why we have those rules.

Treat people like easily hurt children and that's what they'll become. I can deal with it just fine, i'm just putting my view forward, why can't you deal with that




posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   
The UK is a treasure trove of these reports, I just posted one about kids being taken away from their grandparents and given to a homosexual couple, I also see in this morning's news that Carol Thatcher is being burned alive on the cross of political correctness for using the word "Golliwog", and now we have this.

I would say that the UK is as close to being a communist dictatorship as you can comfortably get. UK residents would doubtless see it differently, but you need to live on the outside sometimes in order to really see the inside, but the UK is clearly (to me) losing the battle against institutional domination.

The movie "V for Vendetta" is strangely ironic, since it portrays a rebellion against a right-wing dictatorship, where in reality the opposite is required.

The question is, when will they take action?

But hey, who needs guns right, you just need a mask and a long black wig



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Retseh
I would say that the UK is as close to being a communist dictatorship as you can comfortably get. UK residents would doubtless see it differently, but you need to live on the outside sometimes in order to really see the inside, but the UK is clearly (to me) losing the battle against institutional domination.


Actually lots of UK residents (me included) do see it that way. Papers every day have headlines and articles about "Big Brother Britain". The UK by the way isn't just that little island near France. It seems you outsiders always get that one wrong, the UK is a large empire still. Britain is the little island near France


I hear every day people getting annoyed at being constantly surveyed, when they put up the talking cameras there were a lot of worried people. Sadly however our government doesn't listen. I've written letters, people have protested, petitions have been signed but to no avail. The sad part is that a violent revolution will never happen because people just don't have it in them.

Political correctness is slowly draining this country. Some areas you really cannot fly the English flag in case it offends someone. I'm not a big patriot and would never bother flying the flag but to be told you cannot do it, well that is just another situation like this nurse. We fear offending anyone and concern ourselves with every small word we speak.

Truly we are Orwells vision.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   
I wonder if there isn't a bit more to this story. It seems to go for the emotional response and might be missing a few additional items. The suspension seems harsher than then action so there might be more to the cause and effect.

Questions to ask: Has this nurse avoided care for the patient based on her religious rules even when the patient is entitled to the care? Has this nurse been warned before about her behavior and did this behavior include pamphlets and offer for saving? Has this nurse refused Doctor's orders based on her faith?



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   
You don't think anyone should be offended, because you would not be offended. You think that because you're an atheist, and it doesn't bother you, it shouldn't bother anyone else.

Imagine that I had a religious belief that praying was actually opening a portal into this dimension to allow spirits from the other side to penetrate this realm. In my weakened state, I would be vulnerable to demonic possession.

Those beliefs are no more rational that petitioning an invisible friend in the sky.

As for the white supremacists, they often do offer racist prayers. In fact, many of the world religions call those who do not believe as they do evil, minions of Satan, enemies, infidels, etc.

Yes, I take offense to being labeled in such a manner. Not because I believe it is true, but because I believe that it is merely one step toward “ridding the world” of non-believers.

So if I am offended by someone praying over me, if it flies in the face of what I believe, if it actually contradicts my spiritual system, then it is right to continue to do so because you don’t believe I should be offended?



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by VelmaLu
You don't think anyone should be offended, because you would not be offended. You think that because you're an atheist, and it doesn't bother you, it shouldn't bother anyone else.


Ick, read above and you will see i said she had every right to be offended because that is freedom. I just said i cannot and will not understand it as much as i try and guess what, that's my freedom also.


Originally posted by VelmaLu
Imagine that I had a religious belief that praying was actually opening a portal into this dimension to allow spirits from the other side to penetrate this realm. In my weakened state, I would be vulnerable to demonic possession.

Those beliefs are no more rational that petitioning an invisible friend in the sky.

As for the white supremacists, they often do offer racist prayers. In fact, many of the world religions call those who do not believe as they do evil, minions of Satan, enemies, infidels, etc.

Yes, I take offense to being labeled in such a manner. Not because I believe it is true, but because I believe that it is merely one step toward “ridding the world” of non-believers.


Take offense all you want, i don't agree with such things either and yet it doesn't really offend me if they don't harm anyone. That is the basis of my belief. Whilst i can see why people would be offended i just don't understand why they would bother making a fuss about it. Seriously now, these people just need to grow a thicker skin.


Originally posted by VelmaLu
So if I am offended by someone praying over me, if it flies in the face of what I believe, if it actually contradicts my spiritual system, then it is right to continue to do so because you don’t believe I should be offended?


Well here we have a tricky issue. Either the nurse should be offended that she was treated so abdly for offering what she thought was help, or the patient should be offended for being offered religious belief. So who is it ok to offend here?

Look i see this rather large problem in society. We are breeding a generation who are watching every second what they say out of fear of causing offense. This has caused tension between groups, massive tension. It is this very fear of causing offense that is directly related to hatred of other groups, religious, racial and other groups besides.

Maybe acceptance is the way. Accept that people have different views, can voice them and the only time you should complain is when it actually effects you in some way. By effect i mean laws or other direct things like someone preaching prayer can heal whilst withholding medication. As long as it doesn't cause harm maybe we should just take it as it was meant and then just ignore it.

Don't you think this would lead to a slightly more peaceful and cohesive society?



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

The sad part is that a violent revolution will never happen because people just don't have it in them.


Sadly I have to agree, British people are tolerant to the point of complete disinterest, they would be an easy race to dominate, and I think your government knows that.



Some areas you really cannot fly the English flag in case it offends someone.


This is terrible, and unbelievable. I have heard it said that flying the Union Jack is considered a racist act (isn't everything these days), I guess I just can't get my puny american brain around that concept, it's just so....absurd.



We fear offending anyone and concern ourselves with every small word we speak.


Well we certainly have some of that here too, but I think you're way ahead of us. I heard there was even a proposal some years ago to make the use of racist language in your own home a criminal offence. I can only sympathize and hope that maybe there's some way out of the rabbit hole for you all.



Truly we are Orwells vision.


Scariest post I think I have ever seen on ATS, quite chilling what's happening to you guys. Good luck though



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Retseh
 



The ENGLISH flag is not the same flag as the Union Flag (commonly but incorrectly known as the Union Jack).

The flag of England and St. George is a white flag with a red cross. BTW, I do believe the law of not being allowed to fly it has been rescinded.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

Maybe acceptance is the way. Accept that people have different views, can voice them and the only time you should complain is when it actually effects you in some way. By effect i mean laws or other direct things like someone preaching prayer can heal whilst withholding medication. As long as it doesn't cause harm maybe we should just take it as it was meant and then just ignore it.

Don't you think this would lead to a slightly more peaceful and cohesive society?


When you accept that people have different views, you accept that your actions could possibly be viewed as offensive.

The problem with religious prayer is that the one who believes also feels that their way is the right way, and therefore, it is beneficial. It does not occur to them that their spiritual beliefs are merely "personal opinions" and not fact, and that somone else's "personal opinions" might be in direct opposition to them.

A Being capable of creating the Universe, light, dark, life itself (if you subscribe to such a belief) doesn't need a PR department. Patients do not need prayer to get well. It isn't necessary, nor does everyone find it particularly comforting.

Your position is that people who are uncomfortable with the idea of a religiously inspired prayer by a caregiver should not be "offended" to the point of action. Oh, you say they have every right to be offended, but that they should just shut up and take it. They should allow this woman to continue infringing on their right to receive a service without weird superstitions forced on them.

You've defined harm by your own terms, without understanding that others might actually experience real anguish over this. You minimize others objections while inflating the possible "benefits" of prayer as being "comforting", when in fact, that has not been established.

It's sort of like believing that everyone likes mustard on their hot dog. You might like mustard, everyone you know who has tried mustard likes it, so you automatically put mustard on every hot dog you make. A customer points out that not everyone likes mustard and some people might be allergic to it so they could be offended by being forced to accept a hot dog with mustard on it

Your employer tells you to stop putting mustard on all hot dogs you sell. You continue to do so because you believe it makes the hot dog eating experience that much more wonderful. So your employer fires you.

Your argument is that the customer who pointed out that your actions had the potential to cause someone harm was the source of the conflict. It is not. It would be your fault for continuing along in your slavish devotion to the wrong held idea that your beliefs are indeed "truth."

Public prayer is nothing more than a passive aggressive attempt to force religion on others who do not believe the same way you do. It's holding others hostage while you put on a self-righteous display under the guise of offering comfort.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 04:49 PM
link   
This is my four penneth. This nurse was suspended (on full pay) because she offered a prayer to her patient. Her patient declined the prayer and I believe stated she was not offended.
The bosses have now commissioned an investigation which will take a considerable time no doubt and she will continue to be on full pay. I work in a hospital and one of my roles (through choice) is to defend colleagues who have been put in disciplinary situations. One colleague was suspended on full pay after malicious allegations were made, another for singing and whistling whilst at work, another for swearing when a patient broke his nose.
My point is these suspensions cost a lot of money, not only does the individual receive full pay, the agency worker who replaces that person needs to be paid, the investigating manager spends his time which costs money. This is all from an NHS that cuts costs where it can.
I understand it is necessary to suspend where abuse is suspected or where the NMC codes of conduct have been broken but sometimes it gets out of hand.
This could have been less costly if the nurse in question was told in a formal meeting that this was not acceptable and could have been given a warning of some sort. She could have then submitted a grievance if she did not feel this was justified.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ufo girl
 


By all accounts, she had already been warned a few times in the past for this kind of behaviour.

To me, this nurse was naively stupid ...... she should have just kept her mouth shut.

I to, work on the frontline in the NHS. There have been numerous times that I could have made a retort or a comment to something a patient has said ..... I refrained from doing so. It is not worth risking your career for. Just do the job you are trained for.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 03:19 AM
link   
reply to post by VelmaLu
 


We aren't going to be able to resolve this one i don't think.

You position appears to be that if you are offended you can get someone fired or sue them. My position is if someone offends you by accident then you can either talk to them calmly and resolve the issue, let it pass over you or voice your opposing view but not in a way that causes punishment some way.

If they are directly speaking at you as a person that is another type of offense. I can see why this is against the rules in her workplace and i have stated repeatedly (which you have missed) that if it's against the rules she should be disciplined. I am commenting however on society as a whole and how we have become to sensitive.

Still as it's the rule where she works then she should be disciplined and i haven't said otherwise in this situation. I just don't agree with the rules existing, but they do and have to be followed. At least until someone changes them.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Unfortunately, this is something that we as a society have now 'copied' from the US ..... the culture of sueing. The NHS is a large 'target' for this kind of thing, being the third largest employer in the world.

I personally dont agree with being Politically Correct as it stifles free speech, but that is the society we now live in and we have to adapt to the changing times.

I am a nurse and a union rep and see these kinds of things happening all the time. Patients will say and do some strange things at times, mostly to the detriment of the nurse. I blame the so-called 'Patients Charter'.

At the end of the day, as long as a Nurse sticks to the NMC (2008) Code of Professional Conduct and watches their backs, nothing should go wrong.

I do wonder though, that if it had been a Doctor rather than a Nurse in this instance, would we have heard about it?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wotan
I do wonder though, that if it had been a Doctor rather than a Nurse in this instance, would we have heard about it?



Interesting question. I believe yes, at least i like to believe that. I think as it was religion that caused this it would have been dragged up rather quickly and may even have been more prominent if it were a doctor.

I understand your cynicism though, nurses really do get the short stick.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wotan
The flag of England and St. George is a white flag with a red cross. BTW, I do believe the law of not being allowed to fly it has been rescinded.


There was actually a law prohibiting its display


Was this a recent law, or are we talking about one of those historical legacy deals?



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Retseh
There was actually a law prohibiting its display


Was this a recent law, or are we talking about one of those historical legacy deals?


It's not law stopping it anymore, just local councils banning it's flying in case it offends anyone. Not all councils are this silly but some are and it has been spreading.



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
reply to post by VelmaLu
 


We aren't going to be able to resolve this one i don't think.

You position appears to be that if you are offended you can get someone fired or sue them. My position is if someone offends you by accident then you can either talk to them calmly and resolve the issue, let it pass over you or voice your opposing view but not in a way that causes punishment some way.


First off, it's not by accident. People offer prayers as a passive aggressive attempt to force their religious beliefs on others -- often in such a way that the other person will be put in a position to not object. People don't inadvertently pray -- it is an intentional and deliberate act.

Obviously, with some people such as this nurse, talking to them calmly doesn't work. If it had, she wouldn't have been fired for repeatedly doing this.

And what is your solution once calmly talking about it doesn't work?

Honestly, how many Bible thumping people do you know would actually heed the advice of a non-believer in not praying publicly? I've asked relatives to pray silently at restaurants so as not to disturb others who are dining, they still hold hands, stand up, or offer a prayer for the entire group, usually loudly and usually getting quite a few dirty looks. It makes them feel like a martyr.

And my point is where do you draw the line? Why is it "socially acceptable" to offend someone with an outward display of religious fervor, but not racism or sexism?

If I am a member of the KKK and I want to recite some saying we have, which in itself is not offensive, but was widely known as belonging to a racist organization, would that be acceptable? Most Christian holy texts talks about non-believers as being evil or the enemy.

How about distributing copies of Mein Kampf to the patients, if you believe it would be healing and helpful? Would that be acceptable? How about the Koran? No? Could we just read a passage from there out loud since no one should be "offended"?

There really wouldn't be an issue if people would just shut the hell up about their faith. . . but they can't, because they believe they have the truth and everyone else should have the truth as well.

You seem to believe that this taking advantage of a sick person is not harmful. A patient who is dependent on a nurse's care, may be reluctant to decline a prayer for fear of reprisal. You do get that, don't you? The patient is at a disadvantage. Often, religious people will prey upon those who are weak or needy to shove their beliefs down their throat. Like church run soup kitchens which attempt to foist their religion on the less fortunate in order to get a hot meal.

Let's say I'm violently opposed to Christianity, having been molested by a priest. I purposely choose a public hospital for care and arrange my life so as to have as little contact with religious folks as possible.

Now, while sick, I'm exposed to "prayer", which upsets and angers me, and causes me to spend much longer in care than normal.

Is it right for the nurse to do this? Should I just swallow it and not complain later (when she cannot exact her revenge on me)?



posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by VelmaLu
 


As i said we won't agree on this and any further discussion would just be rehashing old points, but hey may as well make one final little thing.

If i buy a patient a bunch of grapes, hoping they'll help them get well and it turns out they are mortally afraid of grapes, then should i be disciplined? Fired? Sued? Where is the line crossed?



posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by wayno
It was obvious from the video that the nurse was prosthelytizing. She had an above-average conviction in the power of Christian prayer which enabled her to ignore her patient's wishes. She was pushing her beliefs on the patient, whether they were well intentioned or not.

That is inappropriate in today's world where we are not all of the same faith.
The patient was elderly and in her own home -- a very vulnerable situation. It was right for her to question the nurse's behavior. It was right for the nurse who came the following day and learned of the incident to then report it.

What is not clear is whether or not this had happened previously. If not, perhaps a simple warning would have been enough. On the otherhand, given the vulnerability of elderly people living alone, it is only proper for the agency to have very strict rules of conduct for their employees.


What are you afraid of?

I don't see how anyone could be effectively proselytized by a prayer in a hospital, unless like in the Gospels and the Book of Acts, the person being prayed for was healed instantly. If that happened, who could complain, other than the cripple who was healed and could no longer beg and had to get a real job.

A more likely outcome, would be a prayer and no instant healing, followed by the patient asking himself "Why didn't God heal me?" That is not an effective way to get converts.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 07:47 AM
link   
UPDATE

Primary care trust reinstates nurse in prayer row
06-Feb-09

A nurse suspended after offering to pray for the recovery of an elderly patient has been asked by her PCT to return to work.

Healthcare Republic reported on Tuesday that bank nurse Caroline Petrie, 45, was suspended pending an investigation by North Somerset PCT.

A PCT statement reads: ‘We recognise the concerns raised by the many people who have contacted us about this situation. We feel we were right to investigate the concerns from people about Caroline’s actions. We are always respectful of our patients’ views, and we will always strive to ensure our staff meet professional standards such as the NMC code of conduct and any policies and procedures which are designed to maintain high standards.

'However, we are keenly aware of the importance of an individual’s spiritual belief, and we recognise that Caroline felt that she was acting in the best interests of her patients. For some people of faith, prayer is seen as an integral part of health care and the healing process.

'It is acceptable to offer spiritual support as part of care when the patient asks for it.

But for nurses, whose principal role is giving nursing care, the initiative lies with the patient and not with the nurse. Nurses like Caroline do not have to set aside their faith, but personal beliefs and practices should be secondary to the needs and beliefs of the patient and the requirements of professional practice.’




top topics



 
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join