It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by benrl
The law applies to the hospitals practices as far as employment, not a patients request as to who gives care.
The patient is not bound by that law.
That case is now a federal lawsuit. In a statement earlier this week, Hurley President Melany Gavulic denied Battle’s claim, saying the father was told that his request could not be granted. Gavulic said the swastika tattoo “created anger and outrage in our staff,” and supervisors raised safety concerns.
She said she introduced herself to the man and he said, “I need to see your supervisor.” That supervisor, Battle said, told her that the father, who was white, didn’t want African-Americans to care for his child and had rolled up his sleeve to expose the swastika.
Another study she cited found that patient requests for care by a physician are most often accommodated when made by racial minority patients. Read more: p.washingtontimes.com... Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Originally posted by hawkiye
Sounds to me like this nurse saw a free pay day because this guy was an idiot and the hospital settled because it was cheaper then fighting it and dragging their name through the mud. She is not much better then the racist for taking advantage of the hospital in a precarious situation IMO.
Originally posted by samuel1990
Lets hope his kid doesn't grow up to be like him.