No women allowed In this guys BJJ class

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

If we had competent doctors it wouldn't be.

Which I think kind of should be a minimum standard anyway.

I notice you keep expecting a minimum standard of competency across fields. And that hasn't really worked out for you so far.

 

[drop bear]

I notice you keep expecting a minimum standard of competency across fields. And that hasn't really worked out for you so far.

Hasn't worked out for a lot of people apparently.

Australia has one of course.
The NSQHS Standards | Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So should black doctors refuse to serve white patients? Should white doctors tell black patients "I can't serve you, because you're black?"

It made sense back in the 40s when we considered black people to be a more primal version of the human race. I don't think going back to that is a good idea.

This isn't about refusing service, but about seeking service.

Look at the research. There's a serious problem, and it appears to be largely from unconscious bias. There's been some decent reporting on this recently, though the study results have been around for a while.

Look at it this way: if you knew you'd probably get better outcomes from one doctor than the other, would you just choose at random, or would you choose the better (for you) doctor? It wouldn't matter to me what made them more likely to do better, because the outcome is the target.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So just having a quick skim at this black doctors thing.

Apparently black people will actually follow black doctors advice because they trust them more.

Research: Having a Black Doctor Led Black Men to Receive More-Effective Care

So exactly racism.

But that was my first look. There might be something else.

This does appear to be part of the effect, though even that is almost certainly confounded. How the advice is delivered can alter the trust. I'll see if I can find the podcast that I heard recently that covered this - they did a good job of discussing this part of the issue.

And patient compliance is only one area of the issue.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So the question should become: how do we turn that around? Instead of: let's segregate hospitals (which is what the suggestion has been).

How can we have white doctors better serve black patients? How can we have black patients trust white doctors? These are the questions we should be asking.

That question is being asked. But that's not something a patient can address when seeking treatment.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If we had competent doctors it wouldn't be.

Which I think kind of should be a minimum standard anyway.

The problem is that they are competent....just less so when treating certain people.

 

[jobo]

This does appear to be part of the effect, though even that is almost certainly confounded. How the advice is delivered can alter the trust. I'll see if I can find the podcast that I heard recently that covered this - they did a good job of discussing this part of the issue.

And patient compliance is only one area of the issue.

well the issue is that a lot of equality initiatives are about segregation of people AGAIN

and its far from a black white issue

my local council responded to complaints that older people were being denied access to sport, by setting up segregated sports and getting really arsy if you said you didnt want to be segregated, thats acute ageism

people who insist on segregation of what ever demographic always insist that is for the good of those being segregated

but we end up with a segregated society which is always a bad idea

 

[Deleted member 39746]

I mean cameras just make sense at some point once you've reached a certain size and have a lot of traffic/students. Just so many chances for who knows what to happen and the school owner, the parent, or the student may really benefit from having footage available.

If you give a lot of private classes, depending on the building and layout maybe, some potential private students might feel more comfortable knowing there is video surveillance.

I'm not sure what is the best way to apply this for those teaching informal, non-centralized classes.

Plenety are hosted out of secondary locations. In other words they dont own the property only rent it for one or two nights a week so cant do CCTV. But more commercial places do it than dont, its just when it can be afforded and is warranted.

Gyms tend to have CCTV cameras though. (down to the several thousand pounds worth of equipment they have usually) and they tend to have studio rooms i dont think any would mind lending out to a martial arts school. (example of some places are safer than others)

I dont think cameras should be in the training are though, entrance/exits and outside it, but thats down to a dignity thing. if anything happens yu should have a dozen or so witnesses anyway if its near where you are all concentrated.

 

[Steve]

Regarding the request for more black doctors and nurses to treat black patients, I'll just add one last comment. I think the root issue here is unconscious bias, and that it is up to the healthcare professionals to fix it, not the subjects of the bias. Focusing on the flaws in the request and arguing from a position of philosophical purity is itself, IMO, a reflection of the same kind of bias. Instead, we should be focusing on where the request is coming from. In this case, why are they requesting more black doctors and nurses to treat black patients? Where does that request come from? Let's fix that.

FWIW, we should apply this same approach to discussions about policing.

Getting back to the actual subject of the thread, I think some good points have been made, so to sum it up for me:

• Should he provide a safe and welcoming atmosphere to anyone who wants to train regardless of their gender, sexuality, national origin, religion, etc? Of course.
• Is he required to by law? Well, in the USA, it depends on whether the schools can be considered a private club or a public accommodation. While I expect he's probably okay legally, the real test would be if someone (like the woman mentioned in the OP) were to file a discrimination suit, and let the courts decide. I think that if he generally welcomes visiting "non-members" to drop in to his school, even if he charges them a nominal mat fee, his status as a private club is at risk.
• Are exclusive private clubs discriminatory? Yes, by definition they are. However, that's not inherently a bad thing. We discriminate all the time, and generally, in the USA, our rights to discriminate are protected, with the exception of some specific groups of people in some circumstances. So, all that to say, I don't have any heartburn over a boys only club, a girls only club, or anything else.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Is he required to by law? Well, in the USA, it depends on whether the schools can be considered a private club or a public accommodation. While I expect he's probably okay legally, the real test would be if someone (like the woman mentioned in the OP) were to file a discrimination suit, and let the courts decide. I think that if he generally welcomes visiting "non-members" to drop in to his school, even if he charges them a nominal mat fee, his status as a private club is at risk.

Just wanted to note that De La Riva's gym is located in Brazil. I'm not sure how Brazil's legal system addresses discrimination.

 

[jobo]

Regarding the request for more black doctors and nurses to treat black patients, I'll just add one last comment. I think the root issue here is unconscious bias, and that it is up to the healthcare professionals to fix it, not the subjects of the bias. Focusing on the flaws in the request and arguing from a position of philosophical purity is itself, IMO, a reflection of the same kind of bias. Instead, we should be focusing on where the request is coming from. In this case, why are they requesting more black doctors and nurses to treat black patients? Where does that request come from? Let's fix that.

FWIW, we should apply this same approach to discussions about policing.

Getting back to the actual subject of the thread, I think some good points have been made, so to sum it up for me:

• Should he provide a safe and welcoming atmosphere to anyone who wants to train regardless of their gender, sexuality, national origin, religion, etc? Of course.
• Is he required to by law? Well, in the USA, it depends on whether the schools can be considered a private club or a public accommodation. While I expect he's probably okay legally, the real test would be if someone (like the woman mentioned in the OP) were to file a discrimination suit, and let the courts decide. I think that if he generally welcomes visiting "non-members" to drop in to his school, even if he charges them a nominal mat fee, his status as a private club is at risk.
• Are exclusive private clubs discriminatory? Yes, by definition they are. However, that's not inherently a bad thing. We discriminate all the time, and generally, in the USA, our rights to discriminate are protected, with the exception of some specific groups of people in some circumstances. So, all that to say, I don't have any heartburn over a boys only club, a girls only club, or anything else.

Just wanted to note that De La Riva's gym is located in Brazil. I'm not sure how Brazil's legal system addresses discrimination.

i wasnt aware that they had a legal system worthy of the name

Death Squads Kill Brazil's Crime-Prone Street Kids

 

[Steve]

Just wanted to note that De La Riva's gym is located in Brazil. I'm not sure how Brazil's legal system addresses discrimination.

Good point. For some reason, I thought this gym was in the UK, but I tried to be specific that I'm only familiar with how this works in the USA.

 

[skribs]

This isn't about refusing service, but about seeking service.

Look at the research. There's a serious problem, and it appears to be largely from unconscious bias. There's been some decent reporting on this recently, though the study results have been around for a while.

Look at it this way: if you knew you'd probably get better outcomes from one doctor than the other, would you just choose at random, or would you choose the better (for you) doctor? It wouldn't matter to me what made them more likely to do better, because the outcome is the target.

The request I'm referring to was for black doctors that exclusively see black patients. That would mean they would exclude all other patients.

The outcome of a single visit is the target. However, policy should shape how outcomes are achieved. Instead of making racist decisions about which doctors treat which patients, we need to address how we can have good outcomes for doctors of all races to treat patients of all races.

Or we can segregate doctors, as has been asked. Out of all the things to start segregation with, that's probably the worst. Because it goes right back to our beliefs 80 years ago that we were different species, and being separate was in our mutual interest.

 

[Steve]

The request I'm referring to was for black doctors that exclusively see black patients. That would mean they would exclude all other patients.

I may be mistaken, but I think the request was for black patients to see exclusively black doctors and nurses. The black doctors could see whomever else they chose.

The outcome of a single visit is the target. However, policy should shape how outcomes are achieved. Instead of making racist decisions about which doctors treat which patients, we need to address how we can have good outcomes for doctors of all races to treat patients of all races.

Totally agree. And in order to do this, we first must acknowledge that the existing system is racist and must be "fixed."

Or we can segregate doctors, as has been asked. Out of all the things to start segregation with, that's probably the worst. Because it goes right back to our beliefs 80 years ago that we were different species, and being separate was in our mutual interest.

This would be a shame, though I think it's important that we recognize that the reaction to racism is a reaction to racism, and not itself racism. Black people requesting black doctors because they don't trust white doctors (for good reason) is not racism. It's a pragmatic response to racism.

 

[jobo]

I may be mistaken, but I think the request was for black patients to see exclusively black doctors and nurses. The black doctors could see whomever else they chose. Totally agree. And in order to do this, we first must acknowledge that the existing system is racist and must be "fixed."This would be a shame, though I think it's important that we recognize that the reaction to racism is a reaction to racism, and not itself racism. Black people requesting black doctors because they don't trust white doctors (for good reason) is not racism. It's a pragmatic response to racism.

no its just racism,

 

[Steve]

no its just racism,

Couldn't disagree more, Jobo.

 

[jobo]

Couldn't disagree more, Jobo.

well clearly but do you have lucid argument for disagreeing.

if i insisted on a white doctor coz a black doctor had treated me unkindly, then id rightly be branded a racist for thinking all black doctors are the same

there is no different if you reverse it

 

[skribs]

I may be mistaken, but I think the request was for black patients to see exclusively black doctors and nurses. The black doctors could see whomever else they chose.

The request was for black doctors that would only treat black patients.

 

[Steve]

well clearly but do you have lucid argument for disagreeing.

if i insisted on a white doctor coz a black doctor had treated me unkindly, then id rightly be branded a racist for thinking all black doctors are the same

there is no different if you reverse it

I feel like I've articulated the argument, along with evidence to support my argument in the form of articles written by various scientific organizations such as the NIH. If you find my lucid argument uncompelling, we just disagree. And I'm good with that. I'm not trying to change your position. I'm just trying to explain mine. Whether you agree or not is irrelevant to whether my opinion is lucid (or cogent, if you're looking for the actual right word).

And for what it's worth, the onus is on you to provide a cogent counter argument. Making bold declarations like, "No it's not," or "Yes it is," is not a cogent argument. At this point, you need to bring something better to the table than your dazzling smile and sparkling personality.

 

[drop bear]

The problem is that they are competent....just less so when treating certain people.

That is incompetent.

Especially when discussing a doctor who should know about these things.