Thursday, August 11, 2016

Racist retaliatory treatment by the University of Utah, within a Salt Lake County facility

The University of Utah South Main Clinic offers in person interpretation services for Spanish speakers. But if you speak another language or are from a non-Spanish country, you're out of luck.

The managers of the clinic are racist. The University of Utah is racist.

Most clinics of the University provide in person interpreters at no cost to patients, as is required by federal law.

But the South Main clinic only provides in person interpreters at no cost to patients if they speak Spanish.

They claim that over the phone is "just as good" as in person. But this is a lie. Over the phone interpretation creates more barriers, is more clunky to use, tends to negatively impact the experience of dealing with the provider in the room, and so on. "In person" is just better, better for us.

Their managers refused to listen to us. They refused to provide the name of their medical director. They run the clinic like a little fiefdom. A private little dictatorship. And they will engage in petty retaliation against anyone who complains or who raises their head.

Racist Whack-A-Mole is what they do de facto.

South Main Clinic, 3690 Main Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 - Midwives for adults & teens; Teen mothers; Pediatrics - all University of Utah providers. But if you go there, you only get "top service" if you speak Spanish. Otherwise you're sorry out of luck. And they don't care about what you have to say, period.

They decide. You can either choose to live with their dictates, or go elsewhere.

Racist hostile treatment.

Clinic manager, "public servant" (in name only, not in deed), a Jeremy Egusquiza, is a racist in our view.

Do Spanish ancestry people hate Asians?

At the South Main Clinic, they do, de facto - by their actions at least, and that's what counts.

Racist treatment is racist treatment.

Additional key details:

1. University managers and staff promised to honor our interpretation preferences.

2. University managers and staff stated we would receive as a first preference an in person interpreter at the South Main Clinic.

3. In response to a complaint about a lack of an interpreter invite by schedulers for one visit, the manager of the South Main Clinic choose to illegally retaliate (illegal in more ways than one), and to pettily shut off our access to in person interpretation at that clinic. The actions of Jeremy Egusquiza were a de facto booting of my wife who is about to have a baby any day now. Petty. Shallow. Slimy. Racist. Retaliatory. And illegal in our view.

4. "They look down on Asian people." That's what my wife shared with me yesterday as we were sitting in a room at South Main waiting to see our preferred midwife.

5. On 5-18-2016 Leissa Roberts, Associate Dean for Factulty Practice with the College of Nursing, promised in writing "Your translator preference is noted in your wife's chart and we will continue to use the services you prefer in an effort to provide the best care possible."

6. On 8-9-2016 Leissa Roberts reneged on her promise, and stated "we will be unable to meet your request to have in person interpretation" at the South Main clinic.

7. On 7-20-2016 Melanie Wolcott stated "I have shared with management at South Main Clinic that the expectation is to have Catherine at all your visits--not phone translation services if at all possible."

8. On 8-5-2016 Melanie Wolcott responded to a complaint I sent about a lack-of-invite for an interpreter for one particular South Main clinic visit. She then stated: "I have passed this on to the clinic manager. You should hear back early next week about this."

9. However next on 8-10 Melanie Wolcott passes along the retaliatory response from the South Main clinic managers, via stating that the: "...South Main Clinic will not be able to provide in person translation services at the clinic."

10. Hostile treatment is hostile treatment.

11. Racist treatment is racist treatment.

12. A de facto booting is a de facto booting.

13. The tone & content of the response offered by Jeremy Egusquiza is outrageous. The man refused to share with me the name of the medical director for the South Main Clinic, a Wendy Hobson-Rohrer. I reminded him that he is a public servant and that the University is a public institution - and that as such he is required to provide such info when requested. He refused.

14. Our experience of being at the butt end of racist retaliation at the hands of University staff is being shared with Asian advocacy groups and people within Utah. We are letting people know that the South Main Clinic is not a welcoming place for anyone who doesn't speak Spanish.

15. Again, it is particularly slimy to treat a pregnant woman in this way who is about to have a baby. Two children at the University hospital. Thousands of dollars. Mr. Egusquiza doesn't care. He doesn't know what went on at Heartland, nor does he care. He gets to decide, like the king of his own little fiefdom. He gets to dictate what happens, everything else be damned. He get to retaliate in a racist manner against my wife. And the College of Nursing also gets to renege on the promise they made on 5-18 where they stated "Your translator preference is noted in your wife's chart and we will continue to use the services you prefer in an effort to provide the best care possible." All these people get to do this - unless you choose to change your mind. Is this possible? Can you honor your promises? Can you honor the law? Can you provide equal and equitable levels of service in this regard across the University Health System?
16. We like the midwives themselves. Usually kind women who are more than willing to help. But in the case of the the South Main Clinic, they are operating within an environment which is hostile to patient care. If we received in person interpretation at Heartland all while Heartland was open (2+ years), then we should be able to receive it at South Main (as per the midwife practice transfer from Heartland to South Main). This would be "equal treatment across the system." But this is only one reason to provide in person interpreters at South Main. Another is providing equal treatment for all races. If you provide in person interpretation for Spanish, then you must provide in-person for all. Another are the College of Nursing promises made to us in writing about honoring our interpretation preferences (5-18-16 and 7-20-16). And another is just common decency and proper treatment of a pregnant woman. If South Main started providing in person interpretation, then they cannot just unilaterally decide to cut us off. They have cut us off, and their treatment of my family is a de facto boot, plus it's also a de facto invite to leave the University system altogether. But other clinics at the University have been willing to provide a higher level of service, one which meets our needs interpretation wise. Yes sometimes an in person person is not available and we understand. Sometimes there's kinks in the system which need to be identified which he have helped with, and the past kinks have mostly been fixed (interpretation wise, for my wife's care). All other clinics try and get an in person interpreter. They try, and that's all we ask really.

Wendy Hobson-Rohrer and Jeremy Egusquiza an Asian-hating racist employees of the University of Utah

Wendy Hobson-Rohrer and Jeremy Egusquiza are Asian-hating racist manager at the University of Utah Hospitals and Clinics.

More info:

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2016/08/university-of-utah-south-main-clinic.html

Jeremy Egusquiza is an Asian-hating racist employee of the University of Utah

Jeremy Egusquiza is an Asian-hating racist manager at the University of Utah Hospitals and Clinics.

More info:

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2016/08/university-of-utah-south-main-clinic.html

Wednesday, August 10, 2016

University of Utah South Main Clinic: Racist hostile discrimination

Racist retaliatory treatment by the University of Utah, within a Salt Lake County facility.

The University of Utah South Main Clinic offers in person interpretation services for Spanish speakers. But if you speak another language or are from a non-Spanish country, you're out of luck.

The managers of the clinic are racist. The University of Utah is racist.

Most clinics of the University provide in person interpreters at no cost to patients, as is required by federal law.

But the South Main clinic only provides in person interpreters at no cost to patients if they speak Spanish.

They claim that over the phone is "just as good" as in person. But this is a lie. Over the phone interpretation creates more barriers, is more clunky to use, tends to negatively impact the experience of dealing with the provider in the room, and so on. "In person" is just better, better for us.

Their managers refused to listen to us. They refused to provide the name of their medical director. They run the clinic like a little fiefdom. A private little dictatorship. And they will engage in petty retaliation against anyone who complains or who raises their head.

Racist Whack-A-Mole is what they do de facto.

South Main Clinic, 3690 Main Street, Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 - Midwives for adults & teens; Teen mothers; Pediatrics - all University of Utah providers. But if you go there, you only get "top service" if you speak Spanish. Otherwise you're sorry out of luck. And they don't care about what you have to say, period.

They decide. You can either choose to live with their dictates, or go elsewhere.

Racist hostile treatment.

Clinic manager, "public servant" (in name only, not in deed), a Jeremy Egusquiza, is a racist in our view.

Do Spanish ancestry people hate Asians?

At the South Main Clinic, they do, de facto - by their actions at least, and that's what counts.

Racist treatment is racist treatment.

Additional key details:

1. University managers and staff promised to honor our interpretation preferences.

2. University managers and staff stated we would receive as a first preference an in person interpreter at the South Main Clinic.

3. In response to a complaint about a lack of an interpreter invite by schedulers for one visit, the manager of the South Main Clinic choose to illegally retaliate (illegal in more ways than one), and to pettily shut off our access to in person interpretation at that clinic. The actions of Jeremy Egusquiza were a de facto booting of my wife who is about to have a baby any day now. Petty. Shallow. Slimy. Racist. Retaliatory. And illegal in our view.

4. "They look down on Asian people." That's what my wife shared with me yesterday as we were sitting in a room at South Main waiting to see our preferred midwife.

5. On 5-18-2016 Leissa Roberts, Associate Dean for Factulty Practice with the College of Nursing, promised in writing "Your translator preference is noted in your wife's chart and we will continue to use the services you prefer in an effort to provide the best care possible."

6. On 8-9-2016 Leissa Roberts reneged on her promise, and stated "we will be unable to meet your request to have in person interpretation" at the South Main clinic.

7. On 7-20-2016 Melanie Wolcott stated "I have shared with management at South Main Clinic that the expectation is to have Catherine at all your visits--not phone translation services if at all possible."

8. On 8-5-2016 Melanie Wolcott responded to a complaint I sent about a lack-of-invite for an interpreter for one particular South Main clinic visit. She then stated: "I have passed this on to the clinic manager. You should hear back early next week about this."

9. However next on 8-10 Melanie Wolcott passes along the retaliatory response from the South Main clinic managers, via stating that the: "...South Main Clinic will not be able to provide in person translation services at the clinic."

10. Hostile treatment is hostile treatment.

11. Racist treatment is racist treatment.

12. A de facto booting is a de facto booting.

13. The tone & content of the response offered by Jeremy Egusquiza is outrageous. The man refused to share with me the name of the medical director for the South Main Clinic, a Wendy Hobson-Rohrer. I reminded him that he is a public servant and that the University is a public institution - and that as such he is required to provide such info when requested. He refused.

14. Our experience of being at the butt end of racist retaliation at the hands of University staff is being shared with Asian advocacy groups and people within Utah. We are letting people know that the South Main Clinic is not a welcoming place for anyone who doesn't speak Spanish.

15. Again, it is particularly slimy to treat a pregnant woman in this way who is about to have a baby. Two children at the University hospital. Thousands of dollars. Mr. Egusquiza doesn't care. He doesn't know what went on at Heartland, nor does he care. He gets to decide, like the king of his own little fiefdom. He gets to dictate what happens, everything else be damned. He get to retaliate in a racist manner against my wife. And the College of Nursing also gets to renege on the promise they made on 5-18 where they stated "Your translator preference is noted in your wife's chart and we will continue to use the services you prefer in an effort to provide the best care possible." All these people get to do this - unless you choose to change your mind. Is this possible? Can you honor your promises? Can you honor the law? Can you provide equal and equitable levels of service in this regard across the University Health System?
16. We like the midwives themselves. Usually kind women who are more than willing to help. But in the case of the the South Main Clinic, they are operating within an environment which is hostile to patient care. If we received in person interpretation at Heartland all while Heartland was open (2+ years), then we should be able to receive it at South Main (as per the midwife practice transfer from Heartland to South Main). This would be "equal treatment across the system." But this is only one reason to provide in person interpreters at South Main. Another is providing equal treatment for all races. If you provide in person interpretation for Spanish, then you must provide in-person for all. Another are the College of Nursing promises made to us in writing about honoring our interpretation preferences (5-18-16 and 7-20-16). And another is just common decency and proper treatment of a pregnant woman. If South Main started providing in person interpretation, then they cannot just unilaterally decide to cut us off. They have cut us off, and their treatment of my family is a de facto boot, plus it's also a de facto invite to leave the University system altogether. But other clinics at the University have been willing to provide a higher level of service, one which meets our needs interpretation wise. Yes sometimes an in person person is not available and we understand. Sometimes there's kinks in the system which need to be identified which he have helped with, and the past kinks have mostly been fixed (interpretation wise, for my wife's care). All other clinics try and get an in person interpreter. They try, and that's all we ask really.

Tuesday, August 9, 2016

Old fart establishment Republicans are against Trump.


Old fart establishment Republicans are against Trump.

Trump wants to do populist trade changes which should make hipster Bern supporters happy.

The more establishment rightists which come out against Trump, the more I realize he must be in.

He's not an Xtian fundie.

He's not a slimy raping (murdering?) Clinton.

And he's got some good big foreign policy balls.

Plus the soldiers like him most. And for flipping once the people who defend America should be given deference on such matters.

Response received:
Q: Clinton is raping & worse?
Q: Trump has been accused of rape. What about that?
Q: Doesn't having big foreign policy balls mean we'll just nuke everyone?

My responses:
Yes the Clintons have raped, and probably worse.

Christopher Hitchens
on Hillary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrzyVt1lbpo


More:

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/every-clinton-sex-assault-victim/

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/28/media-ignores-bill-clinton-double-rape-bombshell/

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/05/11/ann-coulter-every-rape-victim-deserves-heard-except-hillary-clinton/

No one left to lie to, interviews:Charlie Rose: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_RqyXT5bt4

cspan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZ6oY4dMeYo

And worse probable crimes of the Clinton crime family:

http://www.morningnewsusa.com/hillary-clinton-murder-list-shawn-lucas-seth-rich-victor-thorn-other-mysterious-deaths-2395504.html

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/BODIES.php

http://www.infowars.com/evidence-indicates-michael-hastings-was-assassinated/

You know those tin pot hat righties who we all just chuckled about? Oh boo haa haa - Alex Jones, what a kook!

But, as OJ implied, if the gove fits, you must not aquit.

And Paul Joseph Watson is a mutch better representative of that section of the alt-right.


Hitch (on Iraq). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cp4U3garYSs

Milo Y. https://www.youtube.com/user/yiannopoulosm

PJW https://www.youtube.com/user/PrisonPlanetLive

Douglas Murray https://www.youtube.com/user/DouglasMurrayArchive
It takes a Britisher to remind Americans about key unique American values worth honoring.

In any case regarding the Clintons: apply the same moral compass you use for all things leftist. All the things you obsess about, to your current party leaders.

Oh pith. What's a little rape? Well, that's just "natural."

She "stood by her..." raping husband.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/27/roger-stone-pets-killed-tires-slashed-late-night-phone-calls-to-silence-bill-clintons-sexual-assault-victims/

"Stand by your raping husband...." to the tune of the song by Tammy Wynette, in a half drunk cornball country tone with a twang twang twang...

As for Trump:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/436890/did-donald-trump-and-jeffrey-epstein-rape-13-year-old-girl

ce upon a time, I was a lib-chump.

In 1998, I was more of a full-on one. A morbidly obese virgin with no children, living in his parent's basement.


--------------- quote of: September 21, 1998 letter sent to a nephew, quoting from a letter I sent to congress

The more people that do what Ms. Lewinsky & Clinton physically did with each other the better. While I agree that Clinton lying to his wife was probably bad - his responses are to be expected. Why? Because when you force humans into a puritanical culture where their natural inherent proclivities cannot be properly exercised, what else do you expect to happen?

--------------- end of quote of: September 21, 1998 letter sent to a nephew, quoting from a letter I sent to congress

...and the above naive and stupid statement I made back then shows how stupid I was.

Cheating in marriage destroys marriages & families, and ruins childrens' lives. So shaming for cheating is also natural, and that's the type of natural that should take precedence in such cases.

But by 2008, I had wised up a bit:

--------------- quote of the file: note for hillary clinton - may 16, 2008.txt

May 16, 2008

To the DNC from Jonathan Higbee.

Hillary Clinton has on her web site a petition about "counting the votes in Florida and Michigan." These attempts on her part to change the rules of the game are dishonest, unfair, conniving, and not helpful.

The "votes" in Florida and Michigan should >not< count in the primaries. Why? Because Obama promised not to campaign there & Hillary broke her promise. So the "votes" are tainted.

Do not give in to the unfair, conniving, and the end run type of approach Hillary is trying. Obama is the nominee. Period. Move on - and let's now win against McCain.

Sincerely,

Jonathan
in Portland, Oregon


----------------------- end of quote of my message to the DNC

A further note for Ms. Clinton:

Your tactics in this campaign have been in the style of Karl Rove and George Bush, and they have been highly disturbing, corrosive, and racist.

Earlier in the race I could have gone either way between yourself & Obama. But your actions these past few months have fully convinced me that Obama is the most suitable President. I frankly feel that you've shown yourself to be unstable, and completely unsuited to the Presidency of my country.

Furthermore, the rose coloring of my proverbial glasses relative to yourself and your husband has now been lifted. When your husband was in office I supported him. Now I feel as if I were hoodwinked.

I know many republicans were disturbed by the actions of your husband when he was in the White House. In those days I supported him and yourself. But after what I've witnessed and learned about these past few months, I can now finally see why so many republicans were upset with you both. And I say this as a person who is politically a United Kingdom style Green.

You've now embraced the "politics of personal destruction" by being an advocate for it. In the past you and your husband rejected this type of politics, supposedly. Now it's your primary modus operandi. So it's sad to see this.

This is an honest message.

Sincerely,

Jonathan
in Portland, Oregon


--------------- end of the file: note for Hillary Clinton - may 16, 2008.txt

Now, as a finally married man with kids, I've wised up even more. A man with a wife and kids naturally becomes more socially conservative. I have. That's "my journey." So why do journeys to slow motion suicide (eg: journeys to gayness AKA sexual orientation dysphoria, gay marriage AKA outlier flaky abusive not even a comparison to the real thing "marriage," transgenderism AKA gender dysphoria, abortion, being "childfree," and journeys to death cults like Islam) get to be the ones most honored by leftists, whereas journeys to social conservatism don't? Runs counter to their narrative.

Big balls: You know, like the microscopic ones of Obama compared to Putin. Crimea? Gone. Islamic State? Born & flourishing.

Nuking? I take the neocon view: We'll only nuke as a last resort, or if one of our cities gets nuked.

But the leftist rhetorical pouncing on the nuke option may show a not-so-hidden desire for them to do some nuking of their own: namely those who don't tow the leftist party line. "Hate speech" Crimes into differing categories based on "what was in the mind of the killer" - but such actions lend credence to though crime censorship via having "hate speech" laws and codes. And thus the entire concept of "hate" crime is corrosive to free speech. There's just crime. All crime is "hate crime." Camel nosing in the "mind of the killer" brings in a whole host of freedom-threatening problems.
Current leftist hate, hate, hate, freedom of speech & thought. They hate conservatives, family values, and anyone who tells them they're being abusive dickheads for being overly & abusively permissive & relativist. They hate narratives with run counter to their abusively permissive lines of thought.


The Clintons are playing everyone for fools. They know which SJW (social justice warrior) buttons to push. But such pushing no longer works for me.

The establishment Republicans who really want Hillary in, de facto, are showing that voting for Trump is even more important.

Is Trump playing everyone for fools? I don't think so.

Taking into account the totality of reactions from all parties, I find high utilitarian value in a Trump presidency.

What swayed me to Trump:

Milo's Y's interview with Dave Rubin:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiA0P9iELAA


His interview with Joe Rogan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnH67G7vAu4


Related posts:
Trump & Brexit: The Leftist Armageddon
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2016/07/trump-brexit-leftist-armageddon.html