Political Correctness

[huskeR32]

You bumped for that?

As soon as I saw that thread pop to the top of the board, I knew who bumped it.

---

The problem is the fear of being reported would lead to people not saying those things and - hey presto! You lose freedom of speech.

As for the situation at hand, I agree this case was overblown. From what information we have, it certainly doesn't sound like there was any malicious intent involved.

However, on a more general level, I've gotta ask - Why does every little thing these days need to turn into an imaginary fight for the freedom of speech?

There's a curious tendency to frame it as an utterly binary battle between Political Correctness and Freedom of Speech, as if every word is a battleground that must be fought for, tooth-and-nail. There is no middle ground, we can't risk letting one word be taken from our vocabulary.

We end up in this situation where people think all of our personal freedom is hanging by a thread, and if we can no longer use the a term like "special needs," that thread will finally snap. It's ridiculous.

@KSaiyu, if you continue to use the term "special needs," and nobody challenges you on it, does that mean that you'll inevitably start using the n-word again? Will you stop calling everybody you know by their names, and instead refer to them with whatever derogatory term you can apply to them? Of course you won't. That's an absurd leap to make.

So why do you make that same leap in the other direction? You seem to see every little thing in life as a runaway train, just begging for its brakes to be released, so that it can mow everybody in its path down. You know what would really happen if we all stopped using the term "special needs?" Nobody would be offended by it anymore, and we could all live our lives virtually unchanged. That's it. It's all done, you can come back outside now.

Save your freedom of speech battles for situations where something important is on the line. Is someone censoring a political journalist? Preventing a bible study group from meeting and discussing their faith? Okay, gear up and fight. Call me, and I'll be right there next to you. But pick your battles, man. Pick your battles.

 

[KSaiyu]

@KSaiyu

That seems like a pretty lighthearted joke but it's not always that simple. It's also pretty heavily contextual. I'll assume your surgical demonstrator is a good person and anyone who knows him well would see it was clearly a joke without malice intended.

He's written an article in a national newspaper bemoaning the state of the NHS now and championing whistleblowers who put patient safety above all else.
No, I don't think your surgical demonstrator should be investigated for a hate crime. I don't support the existence of hate crimes in the first place.

But I don't think it's always as simple as your example.

And my example. What happens if someone complains to the police.

Just like the fear of being branded "overly PC"

No law can be brought against you for being "overly PC"

But pick your battles, man. Pick your battles.

Head teacher, after years of service leading an "outstanding" school is dragged through a 6 month investigation.

All for calling a SEN (special educational needs) student a student who requires special needs.

 

[huskeR32]

Head teacher, after years of service leading an "outstanding" school is dragged through a 6 month investigation.

All for calling a SEN (special educational needs) student a student who requires special needs.

Did you read my post?

As for the situation at hand, I agree this case was overblown. From what information we have, it certainly doesn't sound like there was any malicious intent involved.

I made it clear that most of my post wasn't about that particular case. Instead, I was speaking to your constant paranoia that freedom of speech is this close to just being obliterated.

 

[KSaiyu]

OK so there's one example making headlines. What happens to the next teacher to do that. Or the nurse. Or the doctor. Or the consultant, and so on and so on.

 

[TenEightyOne]

OK so there's one example making headlines. What happens to the next teacher to do that. Or the nurse. Or the doctor. Or the consultant, and so on and so on.

People will continue to be free to say that it's inappropriate behaviour, if they choose to do so. It's called freedom of speech in a democracy.

 

[KSaiyu]

Yes...but....they all have the potential to be investigated for hate crimes! That's what I'm saying - they're not free. Investigations can have consequences.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Yes...but....they all have the potential to be investigated for hate crimes!

Yes. What's the problem? Do you suggest that certain parties have automatic immunity as they're automatically beyond reproach?

 

[KSaiyu]

No, I'm trying to show you how ludicrous it is: people shouldn't be given immunity since it shouldn't be there in the first place. I thought they were a good idea a few months ago too (when I used to cite the Human Rights Act against the Libertarians here), but surely this is proof that they're destructive and need scrapping.

 

[huskeR32]

Am I the only person having trouble deciphering that?

 

[squadops]

Autistic children do have special needs, I thought the injustice was in not recognizing that.

 

[huskeR32]

Autistic children do have special needs, I thought the injustice was in not recognizing that.

And it's your contention that the only possible way to recognize that is by referring to them as "special needs" students?

 

[KSaiyu]

Am I the only person having trouble deciphering that?

I'm talking about "hate laws".

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm talking about "hate laws".

Such laws (not that they're actually called that) shouldn't exist?

 

[squadops]

And it's your contention that the only possible way to recognize that is by referring to them as "special needs" students?

Not the only possible way, certainly the most logical way. I suppose we could refer to them as "those kids who like icecream".

 

[huskeR32]

I'm talking about "hate laws".

No, I'm trying to show you how ludicrous it is: people shouldn't be given immunity since it shouldn't be there in the first place. I thought they were a good idea a few months ago too (when I used to cite the Human Rights Act against the Libertarians here), but surely this is proof that they're destructive and need scrapping.

This situation, in your eyes, is proof that hate laws are destructive and need scrapping?

What destruction was caused? She was cleared of any wrongdoing!

Also, how is that "proof" they need scrapping? Let's scrap rape laws, because it really sucks for the guys who are incorrectly charged with it, and go through a trial where they end up being declared innocent. Not to downplay how terrible it must be to experience that, but that's a really shaky reason to scrap a law.

---

Not the only possible way, certainly the most logical way. I suppose we could refer to them as "those kids who like icecream".

Or we could refer to them with an alternate term that still communicates their condition, but is one they don't find offensive and have asked be used instead.

Give me a break.

 

[squadops]

Such as autistic?

 

[huskeR32]

Such as autistic?

If that's what they'd prefer, sure. It's no skin off my back.

 

[FoolKiller]

The problem isn't being accused of violating a law. It's that the law exists.


But in the U.S. there is currently a case of political correctness that has the potential to be a serious issue if the woman complaining wins.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nursing-student-failed-class-twice-170604362.html


A nursing student with anxiety and depression issues fails a required class twice, the second time she received special testing environments and extra test time. She is suing because she claims the professor didn't respond to questions she left him over the telephone.

Should we give special conditions in training for potentially life-saving jobs? A nurse, even in a pediatrician office, may face emergency situations. There are no special environments or extra time. There is no room for anxiety that leaves you unable to function. As someone with medical issues and a family, I don't want this woman becoming a nurse. Life gave you a crappy hand. Suck it up and find something you can do without problems just getting the training.

 

[TenEightyOne]

A nursing student with anxiety and depression issues fails a required class twice, the second time she received special testing environments and extra test time. She is suing because she claims the professor didn't respond to questions she left him over the telephone.

Should we give special conditions in training for potentially life-saving jobs? A nurse, even in a pediatrician office, may face emergency situations. There are no special environments or extra time. There is no room for anxiety that leaves you unable to function. As someone with medical issues and a family, I don't want this woman becoming a nurse. Life gave you a crappy hand. Suck it up and find something you can do without problems just getting the training.

She's unlikely to need to sit an exam to save a patient... but she needs to pass an exam to be in that position. One aptitude doesn't equal another.

 

[Joel]

He's written an article in a national newspaper bemoaning the state of the NHS now and championing whistleblowers who put patient safety above all else.

So someone very highly accomplished in his field who is well known. Again, I'm sure he's a good person and that he meant it in good humour. I don't support the laws, I don't support any speech laws, and I don't even support the NHS in the first place. But can you see why someone wouldn't feel safe calling him out if they thought it was offensive? It's not as simple as "everyone in the room laughed, so why do the PC police hate jokes?"

A nursing student with anxiety and depression issues fails a required class twice, the second time she received special testing environments and extra test time. She is suing because she claims the professor didn't respond to questions she left him over the telephone.

This seems entirely reasonable to me, and I don't see how this is political correctness. She was told she'd be given certain accommodations, and then didn't get them. Why is it political correctness or unreasonable to then sue the school for damages? $75k is a high number but it's completely reasonable to sue for the tuition money she lost, and there's plenty of precedent of damages awarded for mental anguish.

Should we give special conditions in training for potentially life-saving jobs? A nurse, even in a pediatrician office, may face emergency situations. There are no special environments or extra time. There is no room for anxiety that leaves you unable to function. As someone with medical issues and a family, I don't want this woman becoming a nurse. Life gave you a crappy hand. Suck it up and find something you can do without problems just getting the training.

She's not suing to be licensed by a professional body, she's suing the school for tuition money and general damages. Of course there aren't special environments and extra time in a hospital, but there also aren't written final exams. You're right that a hospital and an exam room are both high stress environments, but the stressors are completely different. It's kinda like how people who are generally reasonable can get road rage, sometimes there's just certain settings which set you off or cause anxiety.

 

[Imari]

She's unlikely to need to sit an exam to save a patient... but she needs to pass an exam to be in that position. One aptitude doesn't equal another.

Adaptability is an aptitude. If she can't adapt enough to deal with the training, I'm happy to take a punt that she can't adapt enough to deal with the job. Maybe there are some people that would be fine, but I'd say the probability is low enough that it's not worth the time and effort and they should move on to the next person.

 

[Joel]

Adaptability is an aptitude. If she can't adapt enough to deal with the training, I'm happy to take a punt that she can't adapt enough to deal with the job. Maybe there are some people that would be fine, but I'd say the probability is low enough that it's not worth the time and effort and they should move on to the next person.

It's not specific nursing training, it's one class she's taking at university. She's suing for damages (tuition and mental anguish). I don't see why that should disqualify her from nursing. It's not like she had anxiety attacks from seeing blood or inserting an IV. She tried to adapt. She asked the school for accommodations, they agreed, and then didn't provide them.

Accommodations for learning disabilities are best thought of as a prosthesis, not something you internalize and eventually learn from/adapt to. Forget about her being a nursing student, if a school scheduled an exam for a paraplegic student in a room which wasn't wheelchair accessible, we'd all agree the school was at fault. Why is that different with mental illnesses?

Is it really so far fetched that she might just have anxiety about tests? People have all sorts of irrational fears and anxieties. I don't see why anxieties about taking a written test in a university exam room means she couldn't handle nursing in a hospital.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Is it really so far fetched that she might just have anxiety about tests? People have all sorts of irrational fears and anxieties. I don't see why anxieties about taking a written test in a university exam room means she couldn't handle nursing in a hospital.

A nursing student who says anxiety and depression made it difficult for her to concentrate

Burbella says the lack of help caused her to break down crying.

Totally politically incorrect I know, but I do not want this woman as my nurse.

Autistic children do have special needs, I thought the injustice was in not recognizing that.

Used to be. Now the injustice is that you might use the politically incorrect choice of words to describe it, in which case an investigation lasting months and involving the police will take place to be absolutely sure that the next time you refer to the particular affliction (not sure if that's the pc word or not sorry) you choose the exact phrasing that will offend absolutely nobody. Of course that's only until that phrasing goes out of fashion, in which case another investigation will ensue...you get the picture.

 

[Northstar]

She asked the school for accommodations, they agreed, and then didn't provide them.

Only they did.

She said the professor gave her a distraction-free environment and extra time for her final exam when she took the class a second time but didn't respond to telephoned questions as promised, creating even more stress.

The only area where they failed was the professor calling back, which considering we have no time frames it's kind of hard to see if she has a point (I'm not going to fault the professor if she was calling at 2AM or on the weekend).

 

[KSaiyu]

More information on this case:

http://www.inquisitr.com/2089497/jennifer-burbella-sues-school/

The school agreed to allow Burgella to take her final exam in a distraction-free environment, and her professor, Christina Tomkins, agreed to be present to answer questions during the exam.


Unfortunately, there was a problem with logistics.


In her lawsuit against the school, Jennifer Burgella said she was scheduled to take the final exam in a different building — away from her classmates. As Tomkins was required to remain with her students during the exam, she could not accompany Burgella to the other building.


As reported by Washington Post, Tomkins offered Burgella her cell phone number so she could answer her questions during the exam. However, Burgella contends her professor refused to answer the calls.


As a result, the former nursing student failed the Functional Health Patterns of Adults IV exam a second time.

-------

Would just like to say before I sit (of course!) a finals exam that on Christmas Day I was involved in a crash call in my capacity as a Healthcare Assistant. If I'm doing that in an unqualified role a Nurse will be expected to be in that position after they qualify (although there will be seniors on the same shifts for the first couple of months, you can quickly find yourself in a position of seniority on a night shift once the hospital training ends).

 

[squadops]

She shouldn't be a nurse if she can't pass the class, even after given special treatment. I feel sorry for the hospital that will eventually be forced into hiring her, not to mention potential patients.

 

[Joel]

Totally politically incorrect I know, but I do not want this woman as my nurse.

It's not politically incorrect. It's just an unfounded fear. There's no reason to believe she isn't capable as a nurse, all we know is she gets anxiety from tests. People with anxiety disorders aren't just bundles of fear afraid of everything, there's often specific triggers and phobias. People have crippling and irrational fears of spiders or talking on the phone, why is it so hard to believe tests could specifically cause anxiety?

Only they did.
The only area where they failed was the professor calling back, which considering we have no time frames it's kind of hard to see if she has a point (I'm not going to fault the professor if she was calling at 2AM or on the weekend).

Well no, they didn't. They either fulfilled what they promised or they didn't. Whether you think the phone call thing is reasonable doesn't change that the professor told her she'd do it, and then didn't follow through.

 

[JKgo]

....I don't know the full story behind it (can't be bothered to read the news piece) but I'm kinda entertaining the notion that this gal didn't pass her exam for whatever reason(s) and decided to get "lucky" financially instead.

I get that she "might" have some mental issues, but don't we all experience some kinda nervous breakdown of varying degrees when faced with year-end exams? I know I did.

 

[Johnnypenso]

It's not politically incorrect. It's just an unfounded fear. There's no reason to believe she isn't capable as a nurse, all we know is she gets anxiety from tests. People with anxiety disorders aren't just bundles of fear afraid of everything, there's often specific triggers and phobias. People have crippling and irrational fears of spiders or talking on the phone, why is it so hard to believe tests could specifically cause anxiety?
Well no, they didn't. They either fulfilled what they promised or they didn't. Whether you think the phone call thing is reasonable doesn't change that the professor told her she'd do it, and then didn't follow through.

No thanks, no way I want her as a nurse. She's simply not capable of working in a stressful environment. If nothing else it proves that her emotional state is dependent on the actions of others and sooner or later the real world is going to let her down and she's going to freak out on the job. I don't want that to happen when she's doing my IV or or shaving my private parts getting ready for surgery.

 

[KSaiyu]

It's not politically incorrect. It's just an unfounded fear. There's no reason to believe she isn't capable as a nurse, all we know is she gets anxiety from tests. People with anxiety disorders aren't just bundles of fear afraid of everything, there's often specific triggers and phobias. People have crippling and irrational fears of spiders or talking on the phone, why is it so hard to believe tests could specifically cause anxiety?

Ooh goodness. Unfounded? She has a history of anxiety and depression and broke down and cried during an exam on IV medication. IV medication is lifesaving!