Blood Donation Southern California

[jillio]

You are talking in circles. I already said that if nothing needs to be clarified they are fine to donate, but if they need to clarify any of their questions that is where the problems happen. They need to be able to communicate directly or through an interpreter. Note: That does not mean through a piece of paper.

No, I am not misinformed. It does not say "are you gay" it says "Are you a male that has ever had sex with another male" That would mean what? They are gay or bi, but it is viewed the same. If they lie about being gay and mark no on the paper and it is found out later they can be prosecuted for a felony since it is a legal document, which they sign stating that it is fully true as far as they are aware. So, I wouldn't recommend it.

No, I am not talking in circles. All people need clarification of the question at some point in time. You cannot refuse to allow them to donate simply because they require clarification, either. The reasons you are attempting to use to justify the policy of discrimination against the deaf client is what is going in circles.

No, they cannot be prosecuted for stating that they are not gay, because it is illegal to even ask a client if they are gay. I wouldn't recommend that you even attempt to prosecute someone for lying about this question, because it is the company that you work for that will be fined millions for even asking the question in the first place.

I have often said that the biggest factor in perpetuating discrimination is ignorance. You are proving that to be true, without a doubt.

 

[Babyblue]

I am not certified. I have taken all the classes and such, but have not done the RID testing because I do not want to work as an interpreter and the test costs a lot of money.

Uh, you know that many interpreters are not certified right? Many are CODAs or just learned sign language one way or another.

by you not being certified is a violation of the ADA law...

You are not legally binded to keep the confidentiality as an interpreter. That is worst than having it on a piece of blank paper.

I do not know what law you are speaking of. but I would highly suggest you look in the ADA law again..

 

[jillio]

I am not certified. I have taken all the classes and such, but have not done the RID testing because I do not want to work as an interpreter and the test costs a lot of money.

Uh, you know that many are not certified right? Many are CODAs or just learned sign language one way or another.

Certification actually has very little to do with qualified as determined by the ADA. One can be certified, but unqualified in many situations, and qualified but not certified in a relatively few situations.

Evidently, "taking all the classes" did not do much to increase your knowledge of advocacy and discrimination. If you intend to work as a terp in any situation, you need to be aware of the areas I have posted on. Obviously, you are totally uninformed, and in many cases, misinformed. That means that you are doing a disservice to those that you claim to assist.

 

[jillio]

by you not being certified is a violation of the ADA law...

You are not legally binded to keep the confidentiality as an interpreter. That is worst than having it on a piece of blank paper.

I do not know what law you are speaking of. but I would highly suggest you look in the ADA law again..

Exactly. No terp should ever be working in a medical setting that is not bound by their licensing bodies confidentiality ethics. However, whether she is certified or not, she is still, as an employee of that company, bound by priviledged communication laws. If she, or any other employee is negligent in record storage, or releases information without a signed consent, she can be prosecuted under the law still.

 

[lmvashaw]

No, I am not talking in circles. All people need clarification of the question at some point in time. You cannot refuse to allow them to donate simply because they require clarification, either. The reasons you are attempting to use to justify the policy of discrimination against the deaf client is what is going in circles.

No, they cannot be prosecuted for stating that they are not gay, because it is illegal to even ask a client if they are gay. I wouldn't recommend that you even attempt to prosecute someone for lying about this question, because it is the company that you work for that will be fined millions for even asking the question in the first place.

I have often said that the biggest factor in perpetuating discrimination is ignorance. You are proving that to be true, without a doubt.

That would not be asking they are gay. It is asking if they have sex with another male, which would be a high risk behavior and therefore make them not eligible to donate. If you go to ANY blood donation company and ask if a male that has sex with another male can donate they will say no. Also, if the person is a woman who has had sex with a man that had sex with another man at any point in their life that woman can also not donate.

I believe you are the one that is ignorant. If you knew anything about blood donation you would at least know the law about men who have had sex with other men. No matter how discriminatory it is... it is the law. There is also laws about visiting certain countries, being in the military, taking certain medications, having certain diseases. Are we discriminating against the person who has Aids that wants to donate that we do not allow? How about the person with hepatitis? If the employee cannot communicate with the person they have to automatically assume that the person is high risk and not allow them to donate. It would be the same if someone came up that only spoke Japanese. It does not take much for a person to be deferred from donating.

 

[lmvashaw]

by you not being certified is a violation of the ADA law...

You are not legally binded to keep the confidentiality as an interpreter. That is worst than having it on a piece of blank paper.

I do not know what law you are speaking of. but I would highly suggest you look in the ADA law again..

I am legally bound to keep confidentiality as an employee of the company.

 

[jillio]

That would not be asking they are gay. It is asking if they have sex with another male, which would be a high risk behavior and therefore make them not eligible to donate. If you go to ANY blood donation company and ask if a male that has sex with another male can donate they will say no. Also, if the person is a woman who has had sex with a man that had sex with another man at any point in their life that woman can also not donate.

I believe you are the one that is ignorant. If you knew anything about blood donation you would at least know the law about men who have had sex with other men. No matter how discriminatory it is... it is the law. There is also laws about visiting certain countries, being in the military, taking certain medications, having certain diseases. Are we discriminating against the person who has Aids that wants to donate that we do not allow? How about the person with hepatitis? If the employee cannot communicate with the person they have to automatically assume that the person is high risk and not allow them to donate. It would be the same if someone came up that only spoke Japanese. It does not take much for a person to be deferred from donating.

Now you are backtracking. You specifically stated if they answer "no" to the question "Are you gay.":roll:

Likewise, they cannot ask if you have engaged in same sex relationships. The only thing they can legally ask is if you have engaged in "unsafe sexual behaviors."

And you have a distorted view of what constitutes discrimination. A person with AIDS, or that is HIV+ is not being discriminated against because they are HIV+. They are not permitted to donate because their blood is unsafe for transfusion purposes. A deaf person, however, does not constitute the same risk.:roll:

And, no, a person speaking Japanese is not the same situation. They could not understand written English, either. A deaf person can.

You really do need to inform yourself of the issues. You are perpetuating myths and relaying incorrect and discriminatory information to people.

 

[lmvashaw]

Now you are backtracking. You specifically stated if they answer "no" to the question "Are you gay.":roll:

Likewise, they cannot ask if you have engaged in same sex relationships. The only thing they can legally ask is if you have engaged in "unsafe sexual behaviors."

And you have a distorted view of what constitutes discrimination. A person with AIDS, or that is HIV+ is not being discriminated against because they are HIV+. They are not permitted to donate because their blood is unsafe for transfusion purposes. A deaf person, however, does not constitute the same risk.:roll:

And, no, a person speaking Japanese is not the same situation. They could not understand written English, either. A deaf person can.

You really do need to inform yourself of the issues. You are perpetuating myths and relaying incorrect and discriminatory information to people.

Not backtracking, I just didn't feel like typing out the whole question. It is essentially the same thing without being as politically correct.

And, no, they legally can ask "are you a male that has sex with another male" The questions are regulated by the FDA

Hi, are you paying attention? They cannot legally write down health sensitive questions on a separate piece of paper because that paper could be misplaced or fall into the hands of the wrong person which would lead to a lawsuit.

 

[jillio]

Not backtracking, I just didn't feel like typing out the whole question. It is essentially the same thing without being as politically correct.

And, no, they legally can ask "are you a male that has sex with another male" The questions are regulated by the FDA

Hi, are you paying attention? They cannot legally write down health sensitive questions on a separate piece of paper because that paper could be misplaced or fall into the hands of the wrong person which would lead to a lawsuit.

Again, you are absolutely incorrect. They cannot ask this question, and the FDA has absolutely no control or power over issues of discrimination. They only stipulate safety standards for the handling of blood products. IT IS ILLEGAL TO ASK A QUESTION REGARDING SEXUAL PREFERENCE. Stop and think. Heterosexuality does not mean automatically a safe blood product. Heterosexuals engage in high risk behaviors that makes their blood unsuitable for donation, as well. In fact, the fastest growing HIV+ population is heterosexual females. It is not the sexual preference that is high risk. It is the behaviors engaged in, and they are not preference specific.

Again, are you listening? Questions can be written down on a separate piece of paper. That does not violate confidentiality ethics or priviledged communication laws. That paper must be treated as any medical information is treated, and the employee must exert due care to insure that it is kept safely with the clients other medical information. If an employee leaves it laying around where it can be seen by just anyone, then it is the employee who has violated the law. The paper it was written on had nothing to do with it. Again, you are woefully ignorant regarding these issues. In fact, you are so ignorant regarding these issues that one could reasonably assume that you do not hold professional status at all, but are no doubt simply a receptionist of some sort.

 

[lmvashaw]

Again, you are absolutely incorrect. They cannot ask this question, and the FDA has absolutely no control or power over issues of discrimination. They only stipulate safety standards for the handling of blood products. IT IS ILLEGAL TO ASK A QUESTION REGARDING SEXUAL PREFERENCE. Stop and think. Heterosexuality does not mean automatically a safe blood product. Heterosexuals engage in high risk behaviors that makes their blood unsuitable for donation, as well. In fact, the fastest growing HIV+ population is heterosexual females. It is not the sexual preference that is high risk. It is the behaviors engaged in, and they are not preference specific.

Again, are you listening? Questions can be written down on a separate piece of paper. That does not violate confidentiality ethics or priviledged communication laws. That paper must be treated as any medical information is treated, and the employee must exert due care to insure that it is kept safely with the clients other medical information. If an employee leaves it laying around where it can be seen by just anyone, then it is the employee who has violated the law. The paper it was written on had nothing to do with it. Again, you are woefully ignorant regarding these issues. In fact, you are so ignorant regarding these issues that one could reasonably assume that you do not hold professional status at all, but are no doubt simply a receptionist of some sort.

I'm telling you with complete certainty that it is legal to ask "Are you a male who has had sex with another male" Go to any donation center. It WILL be one of the questions, without a doubt.

No, this is not a doctor office. No other medical information can be documented except on pre-sanctioned forms. Any other papers would be thrown in the trash which means medical information would be thrown in the trash which means anyone could pick it up and read it and obtain personal information about that person. We do not have files for people, all of the forms are kept in order of the number attached to that batch of blood, it is not related to the person it self, no papers can be attached to the form except for pre sanctioned documents that were approved by the FDA.

I am an EMT, a Phlebotomist, I obtain my degree in biological and physical science in December, and start the Physician Assistant program next year. What are you? A stay at home mom with four kids that loves arguing online to make yourself feel important?

 

[jillio]

I'm telling you with complete certainty that it is legal to ask "Are you a male who has had sex with another male" Go to any donation center. It WILL be one of the questions, without a doubt.

No, this is not a doctor office. No other medical information can be documented except on pre-sanctioned forms. Any other papers would be thrown in the trash which means medical information would be thrown in the trash which means anyone could pick it up and read it and obtain personal information about that person. We do not have files for people, all of the forms are kept in order of the number attached to that batch of blood, it is not related to the person it self, no papers can be attached to the form except for pre sanctioned documents that were approved by the FDA.

I am an EMT, a Phlebotomist, I obtain my degree in biological and physical science in December, and start the Physician Assistant program next year. What are you? A stay at home mom with four kids that loves arguing online to make yourself feel important?

You just keep right on insisting that it is legal. I'm sure as soon as the company you work for gets sued for asking that question, you will change your mind.:roll:

No, dear. I am a Ph.D. in counseling psychology with certification in rehabilitation counseling. I am fully licensed and certified in both rehab counseling for individuals with disabilities, and certified as a mental health professional for the deaf population. My license is national, my certifications are in several states. I am bound professionally by confidentiality ethics and legally by priviledged communication laws. Trust me, my information is much more correct and in-depth that the information you are providing.

 

[lmvashaw]

You just keep right on insisting that it is legal. I'm sure as soon as the company you work for gets sued for asking that question, you will change your mind.:roll:

No, dear. I am a Ph.D. in counseling psychology with certification in rehabilitation counseling. I am fully licensed and certified in both rehab counseling for individuals with disabilities, and certified as a mental health professional for the deaf population. My license is national, my certifications are in several states. I am bound professionally by confidentiality ethics and legally by priviledged communication laws. Trust me, my information is much more correct and in-depth that the information you are providing.

Try me, go to a donation center. They will have the question.

Ah, psychology. Shouldn't be considered a medical practice in my opinion, but that is just me.

You don't seem to understand that text books don't always give the whole picture. And you do not understand that different sectors are regulated differently. I am actually involved in all of this. Your information, as with all the psychology field, are based only on theory, not practice. You can talk to me about legality in drug production (Again since blood was verified as a drug) once you get your law degree specializing in medical law. kay?

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

Ah, psychology. Shouldn't be considered a medical practice in my opinion, but that is just me

Stop right there. That kind of mentality what lead to hard-stat scientists (such as chemistry and physics) believing that biology is an invalid field. Or other liberal arts programs believing that anthropology is fake and so on.

Academic or career elitism is disgusting.

 

[jillio]

Try me, go to a donation center. They will have the question.

Donation centers are subject to the same confidentiality and priviledged communication laws as is any medical facility. They do not have different regulations simply because they are a donation center.

Ah, psychology. Shouldn't be considered a medical practice in my opinion, but that is just me.

Psychology isn't considered a "medical" practice.:roll: Just more indication that you are ill informed. However, a practicing therapist, psychologist or counselor is subject to the same confidentiality of information and priviledged communication laws as is a physician and his or her employees, a donation center and the employees, a sperm bank and the employees, a dialysis center and their employees, and any other medical facility and their employees. A lawyer does not have a medical practice, either, but they are also subject to the same ethics and laws regarding confidentiality and priviledged communication. Perhaps when you become a professional, you will understand more.

You don't seem to understand that text books don't always give the whole picture. And you do not understand that different sectors are regulated differently. I am actually involved in all of this. Your information, as with all the psychology field, are based only on theory, not practice. You can talk to me about legality in drug production (Again since blood was verified as a drug) once you get your law degree specializing in medical law. kay?

Perhaps you should spend a bit more time with those text books before you try to present information regarding a topic on which you are clearly uneducated. My information is not based on theory, it is based on practice. I am a practicing professional. My professional affiliation, my license, and my certification proves that. And, as a practicing professional, I am engaged at an in-depth level with both the issues of confidentiality and priviledged communication on a daily basis. Your resorting to ad hominem attacks when you have been proven wrong by a professional is typical of one who is attempting to present themselves as informed when they clearly are not.
Quite frankly, you can talk to me when you get your degree in any field, but most especially in one that leads to professional status and is bound by confidentiality and priviledged communication laws. Quite obviously, you don't even know the difference between the 2. Being involved as a volunteer at a blood donation center certainly doesn't qualify you to speak as an expert on any of these issues, and you have proven that through your posts.

Confidentiality and priviledged communication both refer to the type of information, and have absolutely nothing to do with the field in which that information is recorded and stored. All professions that retain any confidentiality and priviledged information are subject to the same laws regarding such. Nor is the ADA profession limited. Discrimination under the ADA applies to all businesses and professions, with only one exemption, and that is based on the number of employees.

Stick with it. You have much to learn.

 

[lmvashaw]

Stop right there. That kind of mentality what lead to hard-stat scientists (such as chemistry and physics) believing that biology is an invalid field. Or other liberal arts programs believing that anthropology is fake and so on.

Academic or career elitism is disgusting.

It isn't elitism, per se. I am not saying that it is worse than anything I am saying that I don't agree with it being considered medical. I don't think they should be able to prescribe medication. I don't think they should be able to diagnose after a couple sessions. I think it needs to be more concrete (for instance tests that show a certain imbalance means a certain disorder) Up until they can do that they should be just councilors to help people through hard times.

 

[jillio]

It isn't elitism, per se. I am not saying that it is worse than anything I am saying that I don't agree with it being considered medical. I don't think they should be able to prescribe medication. I don't think they should be able to diagnose after a couple sessions. I think it needs to be more concrete (for instance tests that show a certain imbalance means a certain disorder) Up until they can do that they should be just councilors to help people through hard times.

Then you are disagreeing with something that doesn't even exist.:roll: Psychiatry is the branch of medicine that deals with mental health. Psychiatrists prescribe medication, psychologists do not. Diagnosis is rarely accomplished in one or two sessions, either by a psychologist or a psychiatrist. Diagnosis is quite concrete. Simple differences in blood levels does not imply a manifestation of a mental illness. It would be suggestive of a predisposition only, or lack of a predisposition.

Obviously, you are as lacking in knowledge regarding this topic as you are in the ADA laws, and the confidentiality and priviledged communication laws.

 

[Babyblue]

Then you are disagreeing with something that doesn't even exist.:roll: Psychiatry is the branch of medicine that deals with mental health. Psychiatrists prescribe medication, psychologists do not. Diagnosis is rarely accomplished in one or two sessions, either by a psychologist or a psychiatrist. Diagnosis is quite concrete. Simple differences in blood levels does not imply a manifestation of a mental illness. It would be suggestive of a predisposition only, or lack of a predisposition.

Obviously, you are as lacking in knowledge regarding this topic as you are in the ADA laws, and the confidentiality and priviledged communication laws.

Right!! That is what the topic is all about. Interpretors for deaf people to donate blood.

If a deaf person does not asks or request an interpreter then it is not required to donate blood.

It is nice to have a Certified Interpreter on site.. don't get me wrong. But me personally. I do not prefer one during any of my doctors appointments or procedures... Including donating blood.

 

[jillio]

Right!! That is what the topic is all about. Interpretors for deaf people to donate blood.

If a deaf person does not asks or request an interpreter then it is not required to donate blood.

It is nice to have a Certified Interpreter on site.. don't get me wrong. But me personally. I do not prefer one during any of my doctors appointments or procedures... Including donating blood.

Exactly. This is about disability accommodation. Accommodation is never mandatory, but based on the individual's request for specific accommodation. It is up to the individual which accommodation they want to use, or if they want to use any accommodation at all. They cannot be denied services because they don't want to use an accommodation.

I have deaf clients that prefer oral communication. I can't deny them services simply because they don't want to communicate with me in ASL.

 

[lmvashaw]

Perhaps you should spend a bit more time with those text books before you try to present information regarding a topic on which you are clearly uneducated. My information is not based on theory, it is based on practice. I am a practicing professional. My professional affiliation, my license, and my certification proves that. And, as a practicing professional, I am engaged at an in-depth level with both the issues of confidentiality and priviledged communication on a daily basis. Your resorting to ad hominem attacks when you have been proven wrong by a professional is typical of one who is attempting to present themselves as informed when they clearly are not.
Quite frankly, you can talk to me when you get your degree in any field, but most especially in one that leads to professional status and is bound by confidentiality and priviledged communication laws. Quite obviously, you don't even know the difference between the 2. Being involved as a volunteer at a blood donation center certainly doesn't qualify you to speak as an expert on any of these issues, and you have proven that through your posts.

Confidentiality and priviledged communication both refer to the type of information, and have absolutely nothing to do with the field in which that information is recorded and stored. All professions that retain any confidentiality and priviledged information are subject to the same laws regarding such. Nor is the ADA profession limited. Discrimination under the ADA applies to all businesses and professions, with only one exemption, and that is based on the number of employees.

Stick with it. You have much to learn.

I am not going to argue with you anymore. I feel my IQ dropping and cannot stand the lack of maturity, especially coming from someone who states they have a Ph.D. You have twisted and turned this to your favor enough. So here are the facts:

1. Yes, we can refuse donation from anyone at any time for any reason INCLUDING the inability to communicate with them directly. It is a donation, not a medical procedure, not a right. People do not have the right to donate, they choose to do so.
2. Yes, we are required to ask the specific question "Are you male who has ever had sex with another male" just like we are required to ask "have you had a positive HIV/Aids test" and "Are you feeling well and healthy today?" And we are required to defer anyone who does not fit into the profile.
3. We are not required to have a interpreter on staff for anyone.
4. We cannot discuss medically sensitive information on non-FDA sanctioned forms (i.e. scrap of paper) each blood donation has one piece of paper that goes along with it normally. They only time there is another one is if a donor has a reaction to the draw.
5. I have read all of the FDA guidelines and standard operating procedures which states that if there are any questions that must be verified with a HOH person there must be a interpreter. (I also previously posted the link which also states this.)
6. ADA says that it has to be accessible. Donation is accessible, BUT all FDA regulations must be followed at the same time. Which you do not seem to understand. There is more out there than simply the ADA for regulation.
7. I have licenses that sanction me as a medical professional, dealing with HIPPA, confidentiality, patient safety, and patient advocacy. I don't need a degree to be as pleasant as you are.

Now please, if you want to keep arguing do it with yourself. It is people as pleasant as you are that make me question going into the medical field. And remember, a patient must be taken care of, but rude patients don't get great bedside manner.

 

[jillio]

I am not going to argue with you anymore. I feel my IQ dropping and cannot stand the lack of maturity, especially coming from someone who states they have a Ph.D. You have twisted and turned this to your favor enough. So here are the facts:

1. Yes, we can refuse donation from anyone at any time for any reason INCLUDING the inability to communicate with them directly. It is a donation, not a medical procedure, not a right. People do not have the right to donate, they choose to do so.
2. Yes, we are required to ask the specific question "Are you male who has ever had sex with another male" just like we are required to ask "have you had a positive HIV/Aids test" and "Are you feeling well and healthy today?" And we are required to defer anyone who does not fit into the profile.
3. We are not required to have a interpreter on staff for anyone.
4. We cannot discuss medically sensitive information on non-FDA sanctioned forms (i.e. scrap of paper) each blood donation has one piece of paper that goes along with it normally. They only time there is another one is if a donor has a reaction to the draw.
5. I have read all of the FDA guidelines and standard operating procedures which states that if there are any questions that must be verified with a HOH person there must be a interpreter. (I also previously posted the link which also states this.)
6. ADA says that it has to be accessible. Donation is accessible, BUT all FDA regulations must be followed at the same time. Which you do not seem to understand. There is more out there than simply the ADA for regulation.
7. I have licenses that sanction me as a medical professional, dealing with HIPPA, confidentiality, patient safety, and patient advocacy. I don't need a degree to be as pleasant as you are.

Now please, if you want to keep arguing do it with yourself. It is people as pleasant as you are that make me question going into the medical field. And remember, a patient must be taken care of, but rude patients don't get great bedside manner.

Ad hominem attacks are a sure sign of not only immaturity, but a complete lack of support for your argument.

You have already stated that you are an EMT. And you have also stated that you have not completed your undergraduate degree to date. EMTs are not licensed. They are certified. It does not require in depth education regarding confidentiality, priviledged communication, or the ADA.

Had you not been attempting to disseminate incorrect information to the deaf community, it would never have been necessary for me to correct you. I just hope that you don't provide the DOJ with the same answers you have provided on this board once the complaint has been filed. It certainly won't be in the best interest of the company you work for.

Again, the FDA (Federal Drug Agency) has virtually nothing to do with accessability laws. That is the ADA (Americans with Disability Act). It is governed by the DOJ (Department of Justice). I know these acronyms can get confusing, but just because an agency uses a similar acronym does not mean that they are responsible for overseeing the same concerns. If you are denying deaf clients the right to donate simply because they choose not to use an interpreter, it is a matter of rights violations under the ADA.

But, hey...no need to get all bent out of shape because you don't know these things. Just keep studying. You will learn eventually.