Re: [OT] Black nurse gets called N-word by trans sex offender. Guess who gets punished?

On 2025-03-28 10:51 PM, moviePig wrote:

On 3/28/2025 10:13 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>

A black nurse was treating a sex offender who happened who was not
remotely feminine-looking. She didn't know how he identified and it
wasn't in the medical chart. She stepped out in the hallway to phone a
doctor to ask his advice about treatment and innocently referred to him
as Mr. X. The sex offender overheard this and went nuts screaming the
N-word at her: he was upset that his wasn't referred to as a woman.
Obviously, punishment had to follow and it did: the NURSE was
reprimanded for mis-gendering the patient and is now at risk of losing
her job and her profession since she may be banned from nursing now.

>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7ugvDzwIYc [11 minutes]

>
I'm declaring the entire legal system to be sanity-challenged.

 The outraged contention here seems to be that, because her guy was a bonafide asshole, she should be excused from following protocol ...especially if it's dumb protocol.  I'm not sure that's defensible.
 https://www.yahoo.com/news/nhs-nurse-punished-calling- transgender-162443087.html
 

I truly don't understand why you felt the need to post the exact same thing THREE times but notwithstanding that, did you read the part of the article you yourself posted that said the nurse was getting advice about a catheter? Catheters for men and catheters for women are different. If she had referred to the patient as Miss X to the doctor, and he'd said to apply a catheter designed for a female, she might have injured the patient simply because this retarded protocol wouldn't let her refer to the patient as "him". Does your insistence on sticking to protocol just because it is protocol really extend to doing the patient harm because deferring to the delusions of the patient is more important than the risk of injuring the person?
--
Rhino