Male nurse sues after firing for treating Muslim women

[The Straight Story]

Male nurse sues after firing for treating Muslim women


Detroit— A male nurse filed a sex discrimination lawsuit against the city of Dearborn on Wednesday, claiming he was fired for treating conservative Muslim women wearing head scarves.

John Benitez Jr. is suing for unspecified damages and to reclaim his job, according to the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court.

Benitez, 63, of Madison Heights, worked at the city's taxpayer-funded health clinic. He alleges he was ordered by a female supervisor not to treat conservative Muslim women, specifically those wearing head scarves, according to the lawsuit. He was told the clinic's male Muslim clientele did not want a male treating female patients.

He complied until November 2010, when a doctor ordered him to treat Muslim women as he would any other patient. Benitez followed the doctor's order and was fired less than one month later, according to the lawsuit.

http://www.detnews.com/article/20111123/METRO01/111230411/1410/METRO01/Male-nurse-sues-after-firing-for-treating-Muslim-women

[bluestateguy]

1. I am not very sympathetic to people's puritanism being accommodated in a health care setting

nt

[CreekDog]

2. Regardless of what anyone thinks, one shouldn't be fired for following a legitimate order

if he's ordered not to treat a patient, or ordered to treat a patient, if he does what his bosses tell him to do (assuming it's all legal), he shouldn't be fired because they regretted it for some reason later on.

[drm604]

3. I think the important question is whether or not the women wanted him to treat them.

The article says nothing about the wishes of the women being treated. If the article is correct it was male muslims who didn't want him treating women. Unless they were the parent or legal guardian of a minor female then they're wishes shouldn't enter into it.

It doesn't say anything about him being charged with assault so I have to assume the women consented, or at least didn't strenuously object.

[Dan]

5. May I ask a question

How is this different than a person deciding or dictating that they do not want to be treated by a particular race?

[freshwest]

6. Not much, but this sounds more complicated. And it was not the patients themselves who complained?

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. Society has accepted boundaries between men and women

For instance, you would expect separate changing rooms and showers for men and women in public facilities. Since medical treatment involves touch and sometimes nudity, it's not that surprising that some people could regard this as another area where the gender of the nurse (or doctor) matters. Remember that it's not just Muslims who feel that gender makes a difference:

In general, the rule is to have a “chaperon” present to protect patients against possible sexual misconduct, and to make them feel more secure during intimate examinations. The official AMA guidelines state, “From the standpoint of ethics and prudence, the protocol of having chaperons available on a consistent basis for patient examinations is recommended.”

In fact, most institutions mandate that chaperons be present for rectal, pelvic and breast exams. Whether this actually happens is another story.

In practice, adherence to these rules varies widely. Often the issue is not having extra staff available, or not having enough time to track someone down. Most male doctors are assiduous about having a chaperon when performing a breast or pelvic exam on a female patient, though many do not use chaperons for male patients.

But female doctors, as a group, rarely use chaperons for either male or female patients during genital exams. In some studies, the number was as low as 10 percent.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/do-patients-need-a-chaperone/#

So this really is very different from something about race. As drm604 says, it'd be interesting to know if the women themselves were demanding a female nurse, or if it really was just "the clinic's male Muslim clientele" who were trying to control things (which they have no right to).

[AllyCat]

4. This happens in some fashion in our hospital

When we explain that we may have a male attending working that day or a male anesthesiologist, the families understand. All you have to do is present it to them and nearly all have allowed it when other options are not possible. There was no reason to fire this guy if they had done what they could after taking the woman's wishes and family's wishes into account.

[msongs]

7. that's what happens when people make demands based on their religious CHOICES nt

[Marrah_G]

8. Did the women complain? Or was he fired for upsetting their owners?

[baldguy]

10. Was the doctor who ordered him to treat the women fired also?

And does the hospital accommodate the patients who do not wish to be treated by blacks or gays?

[CanonRay]

11. If he'd have refused to treat them, he'd have been fired.

Talk about a lose-lose proposition

[Ilsa]

12. He has a license to consider as well.

He may have felt a duty to provide care for the women, especially if another nurse was not immediately available.

He was caught in a trap. It's certainly a Lise-Lise proposition.

All patients should be informed that their care might be provided by a person of the opposite gender. If uncomfortable, they can request another nurse, but they need to understand that the clinic may not be able to accommodate.