According to a couple Delta flight attendants, black women can't be doctors

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
I imagine if they're on a plane, as was the case, when someone has a medical problem and another person is attempting to perform aid, being on the plane is justification for them to inset themselves into the situation. You have no idea what the situation may have looked at or why they questioned her. This is a one sided create a problem story. Same shit, different day. Those feelings...

If you had read what I said I can see a reasonable basis for the verification of authority to practice. That was done and that is not my issue. What is would be the questioning of the veracity without any justification (they could have none) a second time while medical care was being given. There was no place for that and Delta is lucky that no apparent harm occurred or else as a health pro myself I know they can have their asses sued off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,244
10,817
136
It was not double checking. They checked a 2nd time because they did not fully check the first time and thought they missed something that they needed to finish.

Black said in a statement that, according to the flight crew's account, the flight attendants "initially misread the credentials offered by the doctor and went to reconfirm her specific medical discipline."
Yeah, I'm sure that isn't spin. But even that story, they weren't re-checking discipline, they claim they didn't realize her MD license was for an MD vs a therapist, which isn't an MD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
11,944
2,175
126
You know what would really solve things like this? If the left championed a program where white males were held back artificially due to their skin color and for being males so that they were less likely to get a job even if they were equally or more qualified than other candidates. We can call it ̶r̶a̶c̶i̶s̶m̶ affirmative action, that is a nice candy coating.
Errr...wasn't that standard operating procedure against people of colour until the 1960s?
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Again, that is not the point (especially considering that is not the current policy). The credentials WERE provided, they just decided to question them.

And as mentioned, the health of the person should be the primary concern.
Why would someone have fake credentials about being a doctor while trying to help someone on a plane?

They decided to question her again to verify her specific discipline. That is to say, to make sure she had the appropriate skills and that she was not something like a chiropractor.

Black said in a statement that, according to the flight crew's account, the flight attendants "initially misread the credentials offered by the doctor and went to reconfirm her specific medical discipline."
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Errr...wasn't that standard operating procedure against people of colour until the 1960s?

I don't know, I wasn't a hiring manager in those days (nor was I alive). But I'm not sure what hiring practices of nearly 60 years ago have to do with racism today.
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,244
10,817
136
So somehow its telepathic as the evidence could be incompetence or unconscious bias.
Yeah, because it is normal for incompetent people to question whether a license is real for no reason other than incompetence. I am sure they have done the same thing every time they've ever had a sick pax and a white male showed up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Yeah, I'm sure that isn't spin. But even that story, they weren't re-checking discipline, they claim they didn't realize her MD license was for an MD vs a therapist, which isn't an MD.

Oh sure, because people know that there are licences for medical professionals and they all know how to tell the difference.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Yeah, because it is normal for incompetent people to question whether a license is real for no reason other than incompetence. I am sure they have done the same thing every time they've ever had a sick pax and a white male showed up.

You are adding in something that did not happen. The article does not say that the attendants thought it was fake. Show me in the article where it was claimed that the licence was thought to be fake.

That did not happen and you will not find it. What did happen was that the attendants checked to see the field that the licence was for and asked if was for her. That is drastically different than fake.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
The reason for them coming back was that apparently they did not check if the licence because "reconfirm her specific medical discipline."

What medical specialty does the law and standards of practice requirement require for emergency treatment? What if she had no specialty, but a garden variety old timey GP? What are the qualifications of Delta or the attendants to make that professional call? Is "Is this your license" part of the official policy after proof of licensure to practice part of policy?

As one of the relatively few legally permitted to refuse a physicians request based on specialty, indeed mandated to do so if in the normal course of treatment is done by a physician outside their specialties I sure as hell know the answer to that. In no way can Delta enact, has been shown to have been in place that permits its crew to make the kind of decisions that would deny care by ANY physician, especially in what may be an emergency situation. If told that physician my background and she asked me to help and I refused to do so because it wasn't related to her specialty? My state board would drag my ass around and kick it all day even if I wasn't required to participate because that's how state boards are.

No, Delta's lawyers would not permit attendants to question fitness based on specialty nor the laws and professional standards of practice. If they did and I were on the jury after an injury? That woman would own Delta and rightly so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
11,944
2,175
126
I don't know, I wasn't a hiring manager in those days (nor was I alive). But I'm not sure what hiring practices of nearly 60 years ago have to do with racism today.
So are you saying those flight attendants were hired because of the colour of their skin, rather than their skills (I don't even know what colour they are)?
If you're not saying that, then I don't know what your post about affirmative action has to do with the topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,730
28,907
136
You know what would really solve things like this? If the left championed a program where white males were held back artificially due to their skin color and for being males so that they were less likely to get a job even if they were equally or more qualified than other candidates. We can call it ̶r̶a̶c̶i̶s̶m̶ affirmative action, that is a nice candy coating.
Yeah if we only did that to white people like suppressing the white Republican vote. Unfortunately Democrats have a better sense of fairness.
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,244
10,817
136
You are adding in something that did not happen. The article does not say that the attendants thought it was fake. Show me in the article where it was claimed that the licence was thought to be fake.

That did not happen and you will not find it. What did happen was that the attendants checked to see the field that the licence was for and asked if was for her. That is drastically different than fake.
Did you even read the article?

Stanford said that shortly afterward both flight attendants came back and questioned her credentials and asked if the medical license she was carrying belonged to her.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,730
28,907
136
I imagine if they're on a plane, as was the case, when someone has a medical problem and another person is attempting to perform aid, being on the plane is justification for them to inset themselves into the situation. You have no idea what the situation may have looked at or why they questioned her. This is a one sided create a problem story. Same shit, different day. Those feelings...
Maybe the next time you collapse from cardiac arrest in public and a person comes up offering CPR, if they are black we'll just take the time to verify their credentials.

Out next post can be Slow the dead man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
What medical specialty does the law and standards of practice requirement require for emergency treatment? What if she had no specialty, but a garden variety old timey GP? What are the qualifications of Delta or the attendants to make that professional call? Is "Is this your license" part of the official policy after proof of licensure to practice part of policy?

As one of the relatively few legally permitted to refuse a physicians request based on specialty, indeed mandated to do so if in the normal course of treatment is done by a physician outside their specialties I sure as hell know the answer to that. In no way can Delta enact, has been shown to have been in place that permits its crew to make the kind of decisions that would deny care by ANY physician, especially in what may be an emergency situation. If told that physician my background and she asked me to help and I refused to do so because it wasn't related to her specialty? My state board would drag my ass around and kick it all day even if I wasn't required to participate because that's how state boards are.

No, Delta's lawyers would not permit attendants to question fitness based on specialty nor the laws and professional standards of practice. If they did and I were on the jury after an injury? That woman would own Delta and rightly so.

I'm guessing its been a while sense you last worked with low income people. I presume that because if you had, and you still believed that people do not do dumb things like this then I would not know what to say.

Delta had a policy to validate that someone that wanted to help in a medical situation needed to be a professional. The reason for this was almost certainly because of their fear of liability. That fear drove them to have a policy of validation. That was sense removed after backlash, but, the motivation is at least understood.

Now realize something for the race thing to be true. Either these people were aware of the policy and did this to harass the woman. If that is true, then they would have to be complete idiots to do it the way they did. Thus idiots.

The other option is that they thought they were following policy and in an emergency situation did not think things all the way through and made mistakes.

Which do you personally think is more likely?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
I'm guessing its been a while sense you last worked with low income people. I presume that because if you had, and you still believed that people do not do dumb things like this then I would not know what to say.

Delta had a policy to validate that someone that wanted to help in a medical situation needed to be a professional. The reason for this was almost certainly because of their fear of liability. That fear drove them to have a policy of validation. That was sense removed after backlash, but, the motivation is at least understood.

Now realize something for the race thing to be true. Either these people were aware of the policy and did this to harass the woman. If that is true, then they would have to be complete idiots to do it the way they did. Thus idiots.

The other option is that they thought they were following policy and in an emergency situation did not think things all the way through and made mistakes.

Which do you personally think is more likely?

Was my response about race? Find it please.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Did you even read the article?

Yep, which is why I just asked you to provide what part you think backs up what you said.

I will post what it does say.

"Dr. Fatima Cody Stanford, a physician and expert in obesity medicine, told CNN she was on a flight from Indianapolis to Boston on Tuesday when a woman sitting next to her started shaking and hyperventilating.

Stanford said she was already aiding the passenger when a flight attendant came by to check the situation. According to Stanford, the flight attendant asked if she was a doctor, to which Stanford replied yes.

Stanford said she continued to stabilize the passenger when a second flight attendant came to ask for her medical license. Stanford showed the flight attendant her license. Stanford said that shortly afterward both flight attendants came back and questioned her credentials and asked if the medical license she was carrying belonged to her."

So, where does it say it was thought to be fake?
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Was my response about race? Find it please.

So what do you think you are disagreeing with that I said?

Absolutely Delta had a policy 2 years ago to check the veracity of a claim of being a doctor. That is why their policy was to check for a licence. You said they never had it, and the did.

So if its not that, and its not race, then what is it?
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
You are adding in something that did not happen. The article does not say that the attendants thought it was fake. Show me in the article where it was claimed that the licence was thought to be fake.

That did not happen and you will not find it. What did happen was that the attendants checked to see the field that the licence was for and asked if was for her. That is drastically different than fake.

Ever seen an actual medical license? Here's a sample:

http://www.mbc.ca.gov/Breeze/License_Verification_Sample.aspx

There really can't be any confusion if the person is a doctor and what their specialization is. These flight attendants probably thought it was a fake, and they lied afterwards saying they were trying to verify her specialization because the document itself likely contained no ambiguity whatsoever about that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
That is why their policy was to check for a licence. You said they never had it, and the did.

I said a license was produced. That satisfied all policy requirements, current and past. Everything else is a non-starter for me. Why? Because it was an inappropriate insertion into a medical event. If I were there? I could produce documentation. If I were busy and some said "is this really you?" I'd tell them to piss off or I'd have their uniforms on a pikestaff.
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
20,480
3,601
126
Unsurprisingly the story misses a very important point. The flight was not a Delta operated flight. It was operated by Republic Airlines. While not obvious to the customer it could play into the policy debate. It's possible Delta only pushed out their policy on this to their own flights and not flights operated by another company.

Republic airlines also operates flights for United and AA which increases the chance of policy confusion if Delta did push out this policy to Republic
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
I said a license was produced. That satisfied all policy requirements, current and past. Everything else is a non-starter for me. Why? Because it was an inappropriate insertion into a medical event. If I were there? I could produce documentation. If I were busy and some said "is this really you?" I'd tell them to piss off or I'd have their uniforms on a pikestaff.

Be reasonable. If someone presented a drivers licence, that would not be enough. If they presented a PT licence, that would not be enough. The reason for presenting a licence is to validate that the person is a trained professional for that medical situation. Saying a licence was produced and thus enough is inherently wrong. The reason they went back was stated as being to validate it was hers and that it was an appropriate licence for the medical situation.

As for being inappropriate to insert themselves into a medical situation, that was literally the point of the previous policy 2 years ago. Why else would they need to check for a licence if to not stop them?