Male blood donor who refused to say if he was pregnant turned away

[Eldorado]

Leslie Sinclair, 66, who is a retired driver for an engineering company, is a committed donor who has given 125 pints of blood in the last five decades.

However, on his most recent trip to the Albert Halls clinic in Stirling, Scotland, he was barred from donating after he said it was unnecessary for him to answer a question on a form asking if he was pregnant as he is a man in his 60s, MailOnline report.

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".

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/music/male-blood-donor-who-refused-to-say-if-he-was-pregnant-turned-away/ar-AAYBPcg?

[+Desertrat56]

The world has gone madly stupid.   Looks more and more like that movie Idiocracy.

Edited June 18, 2022 by Desertrat56

[Still Waters]

Quote

 This time around, there was a question I hadn't seen before: 'Are you pregnant, or have you been in the last six months?' which required a yes or no answer.

"It is nonsensical and it makes me angry because there are vulnerable people waiting for blood, including children, and in desperate need of help. But they've been denied my blood because of the obligation to answer a question that can't possibly be answered."

Unless I'm missing something here?  "a question that can't possibly be answered." Yes it can.

It's himself who's denying someone of his blood. Why didn't he just answer "no" to the question instead of making a big song and dance about it. It would have been obvious on the form that he was a male and therefore the question was N/A.

[Duke Wellington]

36 minutes ago, Eldorado said:

Leslie Sinclair, 66, who is a retired driver for an engineering company, is a committed donor who has given 125 pints of blood in the last five decades.

However, on his most recent trip to the Albert Halls clinic in Stirling, Scotland, he was barred from donating after he said it was unnecessary for him to answer a question on a form asking if he was pregnant as he is a man in his 60s, MailOnline report.

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".

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/music/male-blood-donor-who-refused-to-say-if-he-was-pregnant-turned-away/ar-AAYBPcg?

I read this article in three ways:

1. A potential blood donor refusing to answer a nonsense question.

2. A nurse having a laugh at the nonsense question by sticking to it.

3. Both the donor and nurse enjoying themselves.

Common sense seems to have ended in Scotland.

[+and-then]

45 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

The world has gone madly stupid.   Looks more and more like that movie Idiocracy.

I've stopped being amazed at the level of idiocy but I'm still fascinated by how quickly it occurred and how there seems to be no end in sight.  

[+and-then]

21 minutes ago, Still Waters said:

Unless I'm missing something here?  "a question that can't possibly be answered." Yes it can.

It's himself who's denying someone of his blood. Why didn't he just answer "no" to the question instead of making a big song and dance about it. It would have been obvious on the form that he was a male and therefore the question was N/A.

He could have been the adult in the room but a lot of older adults are tiring of that role because they are watching actual insanity being normalized.  I hope he doesn't bother the staff at that site again.  We have a rule over here regarding ethnicity and most forms we complete for health services want to know your race/ethnicity.  I used to answer it but lately I use my option to decline to answer.  It will be interesting to see when that rule will be changed.

[acute]

This makes sense, because men in their 60's can still be fertile.

So, even if he's not lying about his age, he should have to submit to a Chromosome Test to prove his biological sex.

Spoiler

Joke! 

 

[eight bits]

2 hours ago, Still Waters said:

It's himself who's denying someone of his blood. Why didn't he just answer "no" to the question instead of making a big song and dance about it. It would have been obvious on the form that he was a male and therefore the question was N/A.

And yet, apparently it wasn't obvious, since a professional declined to accept that he wasn't pregnant without his statement that ... that what? ... that he didn't identify as pregnant?

I don't know how things are in Scotland, but here in the US when a transaction between a professional and a lay person goes amiss, it is the professional whose judgment is held to the higher standard of scrutiny. An opportunity to accommodate a willing and qualified blood donor was squandered, and it was the professional's (or the professional's supervisors') choice to accept or decline the donation.

[Still Waters]

I don't know how things are in Scotland either, but apparently it was a requirement for him to complete the form fully before they were willing to accept his blood.

The question about pregnancy is obviously aimed at the females which is a flaw for any male having the same form to fill in. As stupid as the situation was I still stand by what I said, he should have put "no" as his answer, then they would have what they wanted, i.e. a completed form and his blood donation would have taken place. All done like he wanted.

If he wasn't happy about anything he could have complained after he'd given his blood.. As it was he left without giving any and all because he claimed he couldn't answer the question on the form. Even though the question obviously didn't apply to him a simple "no" would have sufficed.

[eight bits]

2 hours ago, Still Waters said:

If he wasn't happy about anything he could have complained after he'd given his blood.. As it was he left without giving any and all because he claimed he couldn't answer the question on the form. Even though the question obviously didn't apply to him a simple "no" would have sufficed.

Because being a 66 year-old man wouldn't suffice. Of course not, what am I thinking?

Edited June 18, 2022 by eight bits

[Timothy]

7 hours ago, Still Waters said:

Unless I'm missing something here?  "a question that can't possibly be answered." Yes it can.

It's himself who's denying someone of his blood. Why didn't he just answer "no" to the question instead of making a big song and dance about it. It would have been obvious on the form that he was a male and therefore the question was N/A.

 

3 hours ago, Still Waters said:

I don't know how things are in Scotland either, but apparently it was a requirement for him to complete the form fully before they were willing to accept his blood.

The question about pregnancy is obviously aimed at the females which is a flaw for any male having the same form to fill in. As stupid as the situation was I still stand by what I said, he should have put "no" as his answer, then they would have what they wanted, i.e. a completed form and his blood donation would have taken place. All done like he wanted.

If he wasn't happy about anything he could have complained after he'd given his blood.. As it was he left without giving any and all because he claimed he couldn't answer the question on the form. Even though the question obviously didn't apply to him a simple "no" would have sufficed.

It’s not obvious because people identifying as male get pregnant these days…

If the clinic wants to be inclusive they should just have questions for male, female and other.

[Silver]

4 hours ago, Still Waters said:

I don't know how things are in Scotland either, but apparently it was a requirement for him to complete the form fully before they were willing to accept his blood.

The question about pregnancy is obviously aimed at the females which is a flaw for any male having the same form to fill in. As stupid as the situation was I still stand by what I said, he should have put "no" as his answer, then they would have what they wanted, i.e. a completed form and his blood donation would have taken place. All done like he wanted.

If he wasn't happy about anything he could have complained after he'd given his blood.. As it was he left without giving any and all because he claimed he couldn't answer the question on the form. Even though the question obviously didn't apply to him a simple "no" would have sufficed.

I agree with you.I have both worked for the health services and bought prescription drugs online. Certain items on a form have to be ticked: 'are you pregnant, could you be pregnant, do you have out-standing health issues, do you have a pacemaker, are you a smoker'? are absolutely standard questions to avoid litigation for certain procedures. He is just making a stupid point.

What did he want, a consent form saying:'You are obviously an upstanding and honourable English gent, we won't trouble you with the bothersome questions we ask everyone else?'

 

[Silver]

8 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

The world has gone madly stupid.   Looks more and more like that movie Idiocracy.

A health questionnaire before a medical procedure is the "world going mad"? Using a pen to tick a couple of boxes is an imposition? I would hate to see it sane. He needs something to fill his empty life is this is what he takes to the media.

[Silver]

I have managed to get cctv of the actual incident:

 

[spartan max2]

Seems like all around pettiness. Like the people needing blood don't give a crap about this. They just want blood. Just check the box and be done with it. 

Same for the clinic. If he dosen't want to answer than he dosen't want to answer. Just take his blood 

[+Nuclear Wessel]

5 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

Same for the clinic. If he dosen't want to answer than he dosen't want to answer. Just take his blood 

Exactly. The level of stupidity these days is astounding.

[simplybill]

“In what sense, then, are we being sovietized? I came to the conclusion when I traveled in what was then the Eastern Bloc that the ubiquitous propaganda was not intended to persuade, much less to inform, but to humiliate; for citizens had not merely to avoid contradicting it in public, but actually to agree with it in public. Therefore, from the point of view of the ruling power, the less true and more outrageously false the propaganda was, the better. For to force people to assent to propositions that are outrageously false, on pain of losing their livelihoods or worse, was to crush them morally and psychologically, and thus make them docile, easily manipulated, and complicit in their own enslavement. Increasingly in our daily lives we find ourselves in analogous situations.”

Theodore Dalrymple in "The Soviet Way."

[Still Waters]

Thinking about this, he can't be the only male going there to give blood so what do other males do when asked to fill in the form? There's obviously a way around it so what makes this guy so special that he felt the need to make a public outcry about it. Claiming he was forced to leave without giving blood because the pregnancy question on the form was impossible for him to fill in. Well other males must manage to answer it surely? Or the clinic would be for females only..

[+Desertrat56]

21 hours ago, Still Waters said:

Unless I'm missing something here?  "a question that can't possibly be answered." Yes it can.

It's himself who's denying someone of his blood. Why didn't he just answer "no" to the question instead of making a big song and dance about it. It would have been obvious on the form that he was a male and therefore the question was N/A.

I am thinking the same thing.  He went bonkers over some stupid question that has an obvious answer.   But the people who turned him away were stupid too.  They could have just said ok, let him get in line and checked the box no for him.   I suppose they turned him away in reaction to his idiocy.  But then, I may be giving them more credit than they desreve.

Edited June 19, 2022 by Desertrat56

[Still Waters]

I'm thinking perhaps there's more to this story than what's been reported. It doesn't sound right that a blood donor would be turned away over something so trivial as an unanswered question on a form.

[+Desertrat56]

11 minutes ago, Still Waters said:

I'm thinking perhaps there's more to this story than what's been reported. It doesn't sound right that a blood donor would be turned away over something so trivial as an unanswered question on a form.

Probably his bad behavior was the reason, not that he didn't answer the question.    But I am not so sure that everyone is reasonable in this instance, including the people who turned him away.    I do know that I got turned away from donating blood at work because I would not give them my social security number.   I don't think I was being unreasonable as that number is not supposed to be asked for for non banking, and non-tax related business.   And I wasn't shouting, just calmly asked why they were asking for it, the answer was unreasonable so I declined and they sent me away.   No real kerfuffle and their loss.

Who can lawfully ask for your social security number in the U.S.  The IRS has nothing to do with blood donations.

• Insurance companies
• Credit card companies, lenders, and any other company receiving a credit application from you
• The three main credit reporting agencies: TransUnion, Equifax, and Experian
• Any company that sells products or services that require notification to the IRS, including investment advisors; banks; real estate purchases; financial transactions over $10,000, such as automobile purchases; and other financial transactions

 

[Essan]

A silly little child seeking attention    

Or was he just too embarassed to being a bloke and therefore, obviously, not pregnant?