Jump to content

Male Blood Donor Turned Away For Not Answering If He Was Pregnant Or Not.

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, melthebell said:

Why doesn't he want to answer the question?

I don’t know - maybe he’s an oddball - who cares if his blood could save a life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, melthebell said:

this one sentence shows its YOU being divisive and using it to push YOUR agenda.

 

 

I'll say it again.

 

 

Does one form for everyone make sense?

Is it divisive to have a single form for everybody?

Is there anything to stop a man from ticking the no box on the pregnancy question?

Is it divisive if as well as men ticking the no box on the pregnancy question, 99.9% of women will also be ticking the same box?

is it correct and right that if the forms not filled in correctly it cant be used?

 

If he wants to be a martyr to the anti woke agenda, he can but he still then looks like a knob and cant go whinging about it.

You've got 63000 posts to your name, mostly on divisive topics I expect.

 

I have no agenda to push, couldn't care less, it's amusing if anything, just like many of the scenes in Python that poke fun at the absurdity that results after putting inept idiots in positions of power and influence. Having said that, this particular topic is messing up lives at often young ages.

 

Repeating the same questions doesn't further your argument

 

It's a game, organisation implements woke policy, one bloke refuses to play the game, press got hold of it, get clicking folks it makes us money, outrage ensued, tv shows and social media fill up with unhinged grifters who'll say anything for a bit of publicity, lonely lefties on social media rant and start calling complete strangers bigots, rinse and repeat. Didn't happen much before the smartphone, we are being played

 

The box suddenly appeared, that only happened because of an agenda, follow the money.

Edited by fools

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, fools said:

You've got 63000 posts to your name, mostly on divisive topics I expect.

 

I have no agenda to push, couldn't care less, it's amusing if anything, just like many of the scenes in Python that poke fun at the absurdity that results after putting inept idiots in positions of power and influence. Having said that, this particular topic is messing up lives at often young ages.

 

Repeating the same questions doesn't further your argument

 

It's a game, organisation implements woke policy, one bloke refuses to play the game, press got hold of it, get clicking folks it makes us money, outrage ensued, tv shows and social media fill up with unhinged grifters who'll say anything for a bit of publicity, lonely lefties on social media rant and start calling complete strangers bigots, rinse and repeat.

 

The box suddenly appeared, that only happened because of an agenda, follow the money.

and in the real world?

3 minutes ago, makapaka said:

I don’t know - maybe he’s an oddball - who cares if his blood could save a life.

dont you think forms for such vitally important life saving treatments should be filled in fully and correctly? especially in the blood taking realm, so much can go wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, melthebell said:

dont you think forms for such vitally important life saving treatments should be filled in fully and correctly? especially in the blood taking realm, so much can go wrong.

I think someone could quite easily make an objective decision as to whether it was possible for the man to be pregnant without having to tick a box on the form. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, melthebell said:

complete nonsense where blood collecting is concerned, a lot can go wrong, it has gone wrong before. They need to know things. Dont forget this is voluntary, if you dont want to give the answers dont go to give blood, simple, then they arent getting your information. if you do go, then you have to fill in the form correctly or they cant use it, again, simple.

 

should we all just not fill in the bits we dont like? how much chaos would that cause? how much disease and deaths would entail from that

he wanted to be a knob about it

Knob 😂😂😂

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, makapaka said:

I think someone could quite easily make an objective decision as to whether it was possible for the man to be pregnant without having to tick a box on the form. 

What if its office staff who dont see the "man" anybody can call themselves "brian" and say theyre a man, especially these days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Anna B said:

That this issue, important / irrelevant / stupid as it is. (you decide.) should generate 6 pages of discussion sadly doesn't surprise me, but does sadden me. We have so many problems in the world at the moment, and things such as this are increasingly jamming up the works.

 

Surely the people involved could have sorted this with a bit of common sense and a smile, but no one dares use that any more. There's no autonomy. 

The blood donor service lost a donation that could have saved a life, and a man was denied a chance to do a good deed. And for what?

 

For the very very good reason that said donor refused to comply with mandatory form filling and data collection as required by the clinic before accepting their blood donation.

 

"Should have been common sense" doesn't cut it when dealing with mandatory legalities or negligence claims or failures in procedure or failure in compliance.  

 

I know you seem to have some rose tinted nostalgic view of how the world works and have always shown some criticism of the amounts of paperwork that carers and nurses et al have to be filling in, instead of patting the hands and chatting away to patients like some scene out of Carry On Matron.... but life doesn't work like that.

 

If there was some scandal come out about blood transfusion service errors or some infection outbreak I can guarantee you'd be first on here criticising the government, criticising the management, criticising the board, criticising the supervisors for not filling in the right forms, for not doing the right compliance checks,  for not following procedures and for not supervising properly. 

 

Simple fact is this Donor was entitled ass who was trying to prove some pathetic point. He should be reminded every single day that his petty and pathetic actions could have potentially killed someone.

Edited by ECCOnoob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

For the very very good reason that said donor refused to comply with mandatory form filling and data collection as required by the clinic before accepting their blood donation.

 

"Should have been common sense" doesn't cut it when dealing with mandatory legalities or negligence claims or failures in procedure or failure in compliance.  

 

I know you seem to have some rules tinted nostalgic view of how the world works and have always shows some criticism of the amounts of paperwork that carers and nurses et al have to be filling in instead of packing the hands and chatting away like some scene out of Carry On Matron but but life doesn't work like that.

 

If there was some scandal comes out about blood transfusion service errors or some infection outbreak I can guarantee you'll be first on here criticising the government, criticising the management, criticising the board, criticising the supervisors for not filling in the right forms, so not doing the right checks, and for not following procedures.

 

Simple fact is this Donor was entitled ass who was trying to prove some pathetic point. He should be reminded every single day that his petty and pathetic actions could have potentially killed someone.

Hysterical, have you given blood today, if not your inaction has potentially killed someone.

 

"Staff at the clinic said they could not accept his blood unless he provided a response, arguing that it is not always clear if someone is pregnant and the policy is in place to "promote inclusiveness"."

 

reminder, 66 year old bloke, silver hair, saying it's not relevant as he's a bloke, on his umpteenth visit to donate blood

Edited by fools

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, SVerhamme said:

There are questions on forms in general  which are completely  crass . They are insensitive and undermine a persons intelligence .indicating a grossness of mind as precludes delicacy ,dignity and discrimination!

If the form wasn’t about gender , then why ask the question ?

I restate A woman wouldn’t go to give blood if she were pregnant or if she thought she was or if her child was 6 months old .

End of !!

Youd be surprised how stupid the general public are, i work in hospitality and they dont understand, read signs, ask questions that are answered on the signs before they get to us.

not sure your point on the form, its one form, they need to know if youre pregnant or not, 99.99% of people will tick no, whether men, women, trans whatever.

 

Its not guesswork, they cant guess whether somebodys male...pregnant whatever, you have to state it on your form, seems fair enough to me.

Edited by melthebell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, SVerhamme said:

and your point is ? 
I am only concerned that we have been categorised ,by answering  ,not very well thought about ,intrusive language,lacking delicacy ,questionnaires . The general public on the whole are not stupid ,I would argue it’s more like  acsign overload .

going back !!
The offenders are the people (possibly a research student somewhere  ) thinking up these crass questionnaires. 

 

 

 

 

what is so difficult its (one) form covering all, one question, a  simple NO or YES

 

During a pregnancy, you are not able to give blood, hence the Question is on the form, remembering it a one size fits all form.

 

So much faux posturing is indicative theses days,  another day in the oh so outraged world of the forum.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, melthebell said:

Youd be surprised how stupid the general public are, i work in hospitality and they dont understand, read signs, ask questions that are answered on the signs before they get to us

There’s a need for a percentage of the population to be stupid, in order that the wannabe  intellectuals have folk to look down on. 😉

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SVerhamme said:

and your point is ? 
I am only concerned that we have been categorised ,by answering  ,not very well thought about ,intrusive language,lacking delicacy ,questionnaires . The general public on the whole are not stupid ,I would argue it’s more like  acsign overload .

going back !!
The offenders are the people (possibly a research student somewhere  ) thinking up these crass questionnaires. 

why is it a crass, stupid, intrusive question?

if you cant give blood due to being pregnant or recently pregnant why not make sure somebody isnt, seems sensible to me, otherwise its guesswork.

5 minutes ago, steve68 said:

 

 

 

 

 

what is so difficult its (one) form covering all, one question, a  simple NO or YES

 

During a pregnancy, you are not able to give blood, hence the Question is on the form, remembering it a one size fits all form.

 

So much faux posturing is indicative theses days,  another day in the oh so outraged world of the forum.

 

 

exactly fella, seems the outraged seems to be those with either an anti woke agenda, or known conspiracy theorists, with those on the fringe of recent conspiracy theory sticking their oar in too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.