Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Ben Royce πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦

@lrvick @0batty_bat0 @VirginiaHolloway

if they mandate you have a phone before you receive basic services like healthcare, then the govt needs to provide an open source alternative phone and free/ supplemented network access

if that won't happen (spoiler: it won't happen) then go speak to a lawyer. they may pro bono the work because it would obviously be an important groundbreaking case

seriously this is big. make some noise

2 comments
Malkbethwendy

@benroyce @lrvick @0batty_bat0 @VirginiaHolloway An aspect of real health care is to have informed consent, in every aspect of care, including how individuals get treatment & communicate with providers of said treatment, so just as requiring all get any specific treatment is unethical no matter if it comes with out of pocket costs or not, so is requiring a pretty specific technological device to get treatment & communicate with providers.

If I get a provider demanding I do this & they hand me a free phone that's activated(& wasn't one I could convert to a Linux OS ) at the same time- odds are I'd run over it with my car & drop the provider before that day ended... If I could convert the device - I'd skip destroying the phone but definitely drop the provider.

@benroyce @lrvick @0batty_bat0 @VirginiaHolloway An aspect of real health care is to have informed consent, in every aspect of care, including how individuals get treatment & communicate with providers of said treatment, so just as requiring all get any specific treatment is unethical no matter if it comes with out of pocket costs or not, so is requiring a pretty specific technological device to get treatment & communicate with providers.

Ben Royce πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦

@BrahmaBelarusian @lrvick @0batty_bat0 @VirginiaHolloway

point taken, understood. mandating mode of care without support for it is not the real no-no here, merely the mandate is. thank you

Go Up