More ignorance. Any wonder the public is confused! - page 3
by TakeTwoAspirin 7,025 Views | 50 Comments
The ignorance evident in this article is just staggering to me. No wonder the general public is confused.... Read More
- 3Jan 20, '13 by LadyFree28Quote from xoemmylouoxI find in the quarterly journal my BON puts out that the going trend isJust insane. What kind of advice is that??? Good luck to that employee. Good to know that ANYONE can work as a nurse now.
1. Practicing without a License/misrepresentation of being an RN (what the person I guess was writing to the, ahem, journalist), MOST offenders NEVER been to nursing school AT ALL...(yes, my BON reports go like, no record of attending nursing program...)
2. Failure to report violations against license (ie, arrested for aggravated assault, check fraud, illegal gun possession, etc)
3. Surrender of license secondary to being declared mentally incompetent.
- 2Jan 20, '13 by Esme12 Senior ModeratorWhat many people don't know it that the Title nurse is protected in 38 states that make it a misdemeanor.Title "Nurse" ProtectionBackground
Restricting use of the title "nurse" to only those individuals who have fulfilled the requirements for licensure as outlined in each state's nurse practice act is a protection for the public against unethical, unscrupulous, and incompetent practitioners. Nurse practice acts describe entry level qualifications such as education, practice standards and code of conduct for continued privilege to practice nursing. Limiting use of the title "nurse" to only those who have satisfied the licensure requirements ensures the protection the public deserves.
At least 37 states are known to have language in their Nurse Practice Act; either explicit in restricting use of the title "nurse" to only those who are licensed or implicit language restricting use of any words implying the individual is a licensed nurse.....
AR, AZ, CA, CO, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, KS, KY, MD, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NM, NY, NC, ND, OK, OR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, WY
- 1Jan 20, '13 by psu_213Quote from Esme12Especially considering that if something happens to a pt based on a decision the employee made as "RN supervisor," or whatever it is that they call it. Sure, the company is going to be financially responsible; however, even if the employee claims that she told her employer, she can be on the hook for a criminal act. I doubt the government is going to buy the "I value my skills more than my degree" defense or the "just take a chill pill" defense.Responsible journalism....
- 2Jan 20, '13 by psu_213There is thread going on here at AN that basically wonders how nursing schools can continue pumping out grads when the market is saturated.
Well, I think journalism schools need to held responsible for the same offense! We have gotten to the point where "journalists" have to fill columns like the one in question here with falsehoods and outright dangerous information.
Maybe this columnist should talk to one of the "can't find a job as a new grad" lawyers (since law schools also have over-saturated the market) and this person can notify her that she shouldn't tell those who come to her for advice to keep doing something that could be illegal.
- 2Jan 20, '13 by RN in trainingThis is me, throwing a big ol fat BS flag up in the air. I mean, why am I killing myself in my senior semester of nursing school if I could just interview super ultra mega great and impress them with the skills I've learned so far in school? Bc obviously I'm as skilled as an RN if THAT chick is. Maybe I'll drop out and start work now! Deurrr.
- 6Jan 20, '13 by PudnluvWhile looking up info about this so-called journalist, it seems that maybe she is not a "real" journalist. Apparently, the Washington Post held some kind of contest, and she won and got the columnist spot. My suggestion is to bombard the editors of the Washington Post with emails so they know what kind of person they have giving out this kind of advice.
Oh, and it was a typo that I did spot and catch, before sending out the email. It should read, crime of omission, not crime of admission.