New laws requiring LPNs and RNs to become BSN by 2016 - page 2
Hello, I'm an LPN (since 1993), and have recently learned that LPNs and 3-year/or diploma RNs are required to become BSNs before 2016 in order to keep their jobs. The change is apparently due to the new medicare laws and... Read More
- 1Jun 28, '13 by nursel56 GuideIt is absolutely not true. If you want to investigate, you can start by doing some research into your state legislature for any history of such a bill. "Medicare" does not have the legal authority to change the educational requirements one must have to be able to take the NCLEX. Hospitals and LTC/rehabs have stopped any changes in these laws from occurring since 1965 because they don't want their hands tied should there ever be another actual nursing shortage.
Because each state write's it's own scope of practice for nursing which is then implemented by their respective boards of nursing, a federal healthcare benefit bureaucracy would have no input other than perhaps to lobby for or against pending legislation, and I am sure most will agree they have their hands full functioning as the federal laws initially intended them to.
It's really disheartening that your Master's level supervisor would tell you something that is demonstrably false and makes no sense. She may have gotten her information from the 2010 Institute of Medicine Report, but even so the year of 2016 isn't mentioned anywhere in their goals.
Many people believe, or did believe that there would be a requirement for all NPs to get their DNP by 2015 also though and I'm not sure where that came from - perhaps from another set of "recommendations" from a report.Last edit by nursel56 on Jun 28, '13 : Reason: add something
- 1Jun 28, '13 by DoGoodThenGoQuote from MeriwhenIt didn't last because hospitals continued to hire ADN or diploma grads and that students simply went to border states for their ADN education, graduated, took and passed the boards then went back to ND and filed to have permission to work in that state. There was the rub, IIRC the ND scheme only covered those graduating from nursing programs within that state.The BON of South Dakota (or was it North Dakota? It was a Dakota, that I recall) tried the "BSN only" route once. It didn't last.
- 3Jun 28, '13 by TheCommuter, ASN, RN Senior ModeratorQuote from MeriwhenIn 1987 North Dakota passed a law which had mandated all RNs licensed in the state to be educated at the baccalaureate (BSN) degree level or higher.The BON of South Dakota (or was it North Dakota? It was a Dakota, that I recall) tried the "BSN only" route once. It didn't last.
However, North Dakota ended up repealing this law in 2003 because so many nurses were fleeing the state and relocating to other states where their diplomas, associate degrees, and previous work experiences were being welcomed.
- 1Jun 28, '13 by T-Bird78Not only is it logistically impossible, as everyone else pointed out, but it's financially irresponsible. LPNs make a good deal less than RNs, so forcing all LPNs to become RNs would then force higher pay for all the new RNs. LTC and doctor's offices use LPNs so they don't have to pay RN salaries, and they'd have to cut staff (or seriously raise prices) to pay RNs. Or we'd all get our BSN but keep the same pay rate, just the title change.
I hope that made sense. It's late, I'm tired, and I think my ibuprofen 800 is kicking in.
- 0Jun 28, '13 by Glycerine82, CNAA lot of hospitals are starting to do it, although there isn't a law yet. In the hospital I worked at in SC all RN's have to have their BSN's within four years of transferring units and any newly hired RN's have to agree to get it within 4 years. I've decided I'll just be a career student.