My partner was admitted to the hospital when they couldn’t inflate his collapsed lung, as it had a hole in it. They put him on a machine that uses negative pressure to keep the lung shaped as it should be. Normally the hole should close but it wasn’t. Ended up with surgery but the problem remained. They were coming up with increasingly outlandish theories as to why it wasn’t healing, even going so far as to test him for tuberculosis, and listing him as false negative for covid. They also denied him adequate pain management, until one nurse noticed and gave him ibuprofen to go with paracetamol. This was all when the covid vaccine was only just out so I had to sit by helplessly while I’m increasingly realising the level of care he is receiving doesn’t match my expectations. But he’s never even been in a hospital and self advocacy is not something he’s learned.

Eventually they transfer him to a larger hospital. The doctor there doesn’t want to talk straight but between the lines you get the message that he feels the case was entirely mismanaged. They immediately lower the reverse pressure. Hold off on further surgery. Within days healing begins. A week later the lung is healed. It’s a miracle…

Anyway, we looked into legal options but there was a lack of proof. The original doctor followed procedure. Yet I’m 100% convinced that because my partner smokes, has bad teeth and looks like a metalhead, there was prejudice at play. I can’t know for sure but I feel like the original doctor blamed my partner and figured she’d have to scare him straight. That didn’t help of course, he resumed smoking and he’s unwilling to seek help because of this experience. I’m honestly shocked at how this could happen, but as time goes on I’ve seen in other situations how people immediately conclude a person is lower class and thus must be treated differently. If you do one thing for yourself, look into self advocacy. Especially when it comes to medical stuff. My own level of care started to go up when I began to have a conversation with health professionals, outlining my experience and asking many questions. But I’m a middle class woman with fairly conventional looks, so there is a whole level of prejudice I immediately don’t face.

We’ll need to ensure that this bias against female (and also male) patients isn’t adopted by the AI. We’re already not properly testing medicine on both sexes. Medical textbooks often list stuff as more or less common in one sexe. This is entirely possible but if the data isn’t properly screened we’re just moving the problem. Data can exist and be wrong for many reasons. We should address that urgently. It is bad for everyone. I think it is plausible an AI could have reached the same conclusion here because of all the mental health problems considered far more common in women. Did anyone ever even check where the source of that data is? Because some stuff really hasn’t been rechecked in the last 50 years I’m sure.

2 mandatory office days even for consultants. If you want to be at the office, fine. But don’t make everyone be because of some so-called fairness. Catering to some imaginary average person isn’t fair, it’s hurting everyone a little or a lot. Alas since I’m working via an agency, I got to follow client directives. Luckily I have good rapport with both my agency and my project team lead so I can kinda toe the line.

Also the inability or rather unwillingness of my fellow devs to follow protocol. Ticket not approved by business? You don’t touch it. Yet the geniuses I work with went total yolo mode on a project I’m not on. So I wasn’t there to remind them and now they’re upset they got told off they spent a week on tickets that they were asked to discuss with the business. And that they aren’t getting praise for their efficiency. It’s government work, not your hobby project. That’s a week of budget spent on work they may need to reverse because they didn’t even put it on a branch. Maybe when they hear it from higher up they’ll listen because I really get the impression when it comes from me it is seen as my personal opinion. No, I just figured out early how the office politics work and play the game I’m paid for. I voice my opinion plenty but here it actually aligns with the organisation expectations.

If I have understood it correctly then A should only get content from B because they are directly linked. Content from C will display on B (via ‘all’) but will not be sent over from C. Else A would never be able to block C.