Latest Comments by MunoRN

Latest Comments by MunoRN

MunoRN 28,676 Views

Joined Nov 18, '10. Posts: 7,391 (68% Liked) Likes: 17,731

Sorted By Last Comment (Past 5 Years)
  • 3

    The Pregnancy Discrimination Act doesn't guarantee that you can get and then keep a job while pregnant, all it says is that employers cannot decide not to hire you just because they don't like pregnant people, or that they assume you will take off more time than allowed. They can however hold you only being able to take off available sick time, you cannot use FMLA until you have worked there for a year. So if you plan on leaving for maternity leave and coming back, all within your normal time off plus whatever sick days you have then you're fine, if you want to take a few weeks or months off for maternity leave then they can consider your position vacated.

  • 2
    herring_RN and Tweety like this.

    I was a bit surprised at the outrage against Cruz for not endorsing Trump, I never expected him to and don't fault him or his supporters for sticking to the positions they had campaigned for. (The fact that Trump called Cruz's wife ugly and accused his dad of killing Kennedy didn't help either).

    I think a true democracy people continue to make their political beliefs known even if they aren't shared by one of two politicians we've whittled it down to. We should continue to try and mold those remaining two into candidates that better represent common beliefs, even though they might rather stick to a narrower set of beliefs. So whether it's Cruz and his supporters or Bernie's supporters, I say keep it up.

  • 5
    toomuchbaloney, elkpark, Ted, and 2 others like this.

    Quote from tntrn
    Okay, let's go with that. That still doesn't justify letting Chelsea know the truth in one of those personal emails that had nothing to do with any kind of classified or fragile information.
    It's what both the initial Benghazi investigation found as well as the partisan republican investigation so yes, let's go with what two exhaustive investigations, including one that was intended to be critical of Clinton, determined to be true.

    The purpose of the CIA's directive to not reveal that we knew this was probably not spontaneous was to keep these groups from knowing what we knew through our own media. Unless Chelsea was a member of the terrorist group that attacked the Benghazi compound, telling her didn't get that group any closer to knowing what we knew at the time.

    Would you really have preferred that Clinton publicly reveal what she knew against the directive of the CIA, potentially putting more lives at risk?

  • 0

    There sometimes male patients where there's not enough extra length between where it exits the penis and where the bifurcation is and the statlock can't be anchored at the bifurcation. It is possible to still use a statlock but on the drainage tubing instead, if you're using a 2-way statlock you have to cut off the nub that separates the bifurcated tubes so that the larger drainage tube can go right down the middle and not get pinched. A piece of tape or something else secured around the drainage tube above the statlock will ensure that a traction on the tubing below the statlock won't put traction on the catheter.

  • 4
    nursej22, heron, elkpark, and 1 other like this.

    Quote from tntrn
    I must have missed the part where Hillary has taken the blame for Benghazi...part of which was saying it was due to a "spontaneous" protest, and that it was because of a video...and then using those lies for days afterwards......where has that been said and then made public?
    Clinton: I'm responsible for diplomats' security -

    The CIA testified that it had made the decision to go with "the video" story for a few days after the attack in order to protect their investigation and additional US lives that would have been put at risk if we revealed what we knew at that time. If she had gone against that story at that time it would have been comparable to treason.

  • 2
    toomuchbaloney and herring_RN like this.

    Quote from toomuchbaloney
    The RNC adopted the following language in their 2016 platform:

    This opens the door to more legislation with the agenda of marginalizing and suppressing those who do not fit that idealized society.

    Notice that the last sentence omits the principle of treating all Americans equally.
    I find that telling.
    That's a carefully worded but still pretty misleading. The most comprehensive meta-analysis (80 studies covering 30 years) found that children of same sex marriages did just as well in school, on cognitive tests, emotional development, etc as did children from "traditional marriage". What these studies found were most important was relationship stability, ie being married three times and being with your second wife-to-be before you've divorced the mother of your children is less likely to be beneficial.

    I'm all for negating the need for abortion through increased adoptions, but their goal of discouraging the demographic with highest adoption rate from adopting isn't going to make that happen.

  • 2
    herring_RN and toomuchbaloney like this.

    Quote from tntrn
    It is always interesting to me how both sides spin, spin, spin. Mostly accurate is not so bad,here you are, treating it as if it's mostly inaccurate.

    Given Hilary's documented lying skills, it will be interesting to see how fact-checkers treat her stuff next week.
    I'm pretty sure I said "partly inaccurate", not "mostly".

    They both certainly have their histories of lying, as do many people, but in the past we've made more of an effort to expect a minimum standard of honesty when it comes to why you should be President and what you would do as President. While I don't plan on voting for her, she has at least presented a coherent and factual description of what she would do as President.

    I am curious what Trump supporters think he's actually going to do as President or if they even really care.

  • 3

    I'm not sure it's a good thing when a top contender for President surprises us by being "mostly accurate".

    He supported a broad claim using very narrow and carefully cherry picked evidence, and even that was still partly inaccurate. More importantly, what is his plan again? What role is he envisioning for the federal government in local policing?

  • 4
    KatieMI, chare, kalycat, and 1 other like this.

    My first question would be what her ammonia level is, CO2 level as well. Short bypass times are particularly important in liver failure patients in order to reduce post-bypass liver failure exacerbations which would produce ammonia levels well above baseline. The national average for bypass time in mitral valve surgery is just over 2 hours, so 12 hours is ridiculously long. The confusion and restless is not all that unusual for any post-OHS patient, but the obtundation that doesn't respond to reversal agents would narrow it down to either ammonia or CO2 level.

  • 7
    elkpark, StNeotser, BCgradnurse, and 4 others like this.

    Quote from cisneroj
    OK lets talk. Clinton was not smart enough to know she cant use a private server to send classified information. Clinton was not smart enough to know its against the LAW to give unauthorized people access to those classified information. That is what she told the FBI, she did not know it was wrong. She also LIED to the US Congress. She will destroy this country and finish off the healthcare system that well all work for. Don't forget when Obama signed the ACA he took $Billions$ from Medicare and Clinton wants to keep doing what he has done, so that means they both don't like the older population. So you people who love Clinton are insane, DOING THE SAME THING AND EXPECT A DIFFERENT RESULT. We as Americans have voted politicians back in to office over and over again and now we are over $19 trillion in debt. Don't forget from our first president to the end of Bush we only had a little over $10 trillion. So what that means is under Obama we as a nation have doubled our national debt, sad FACT. NOW its both democrats and republicans they all voted to keep raising the debt limit and yes the President kept signing it in to law.
    Why do I support Trump, well he is a business man not a career politician. Yes he says stupid things, but he is not racist for wanting to enforce CURRENT LAWS that are already on the books. Building a wall on the southern boarder is already a law, well to build 700 miles. But our current congress and president refuse to fund it. We already have a law that says deport those here Illegally but our current president refuses to faithfully execute that law. I will never again vote for a career politician, we need term limits in Washington and a balanced budget amendment. How come senators and congressmen get better retirement then lets say a nurse who works at the Veteran Affairs?

    I have so much more to say, but now my rant is over.
    You've pretty well captured why Trump has been successful, there are plenty of people who don't care if what someone is saying has anything to do with reality.

    You've complained that our government doesn't spend enough (on a border wall, on more funding to deal with the deportation backlog) and support someone promising to cut revenue drastically, yet also complain about the size of the deficit. I don't know that there have been any candidates in recent history whose policy proposals would increase the deficit as much as Trump. His tax plan would add $9.5 trillion to the deficit over ten years, his healthcare plan would add $550 billion (and at the same time double the number of uninsured and everyone would potentially be underinsured), etc. His has promised to cut military spending although hasn't said how much, but even if he completely stopped paying for the military he'd still be adding to the debt overall with his other spending increases and revenue cuts.

    It's fine if you don't have anything against his character, but at least take a look at what he actually plans to do.

  • 2
    Nurse Leigh and emtb2rn like this.

    Quote from PinayUSA
    The hotbed of terrorism is in the Middle East and soon the USA is gonna have to deal with it. In the Middle East man is king and a woman is a second class citizen, some countries they have to ask for permission to go out in public and many countries allow a man to have multiply wives.

    So how is President whom is seen as an enabler who allows her husband to have multiply affairs gonna deal with leaders and Kings whom only see females as second class citizens?
    So you feel that the best person to lead America is someone who Arabic kings would admire, which in your view includes not being cheated on and working through that, instead we should pick someone who's been the adulterer rather than the adulteree? Does he also get credit for having multiple wives even though he wasn't married to more than one at a time?

  • 5

    Yes, that's the full video that led to an indictment against this group for making false claims, if you've watched it then you know that PP made it clear they didn't allow fetal tissue donations to be a source of profit.

  • 1
    Horseshoe likes this.

    In general I don't think it's appropriate to put someone in jail for symptoms of a medical condition. It's important to understand "DT's", specifically that the "D" stands for delirium, since that is a defining symptom of this condition. Your suggestion that we should just explain to the patient that assaulting staff is illegal assumes some degree of rational thinking on the part of a patient in DT's, which typically just doesn't exist in that state.

  • 2
    Been there,done that and llg like this.

    Those new grad time commitment contracts are usually pretty airtight, it's unlikely you'll get out of paying the penalty for leaving early. It's not unheard of for hospitals to have no-compete agreements with affiliated medical groups, so if the hospital you currently work at "part owns" the dermatology practice that offered you a job then it's quite possible you could end up owing $12,000 and yet have no job at either place. I would discuss your situation with the dermatology practice prior to committing to that penalty to make sure you'll at least have a job there.

  • 2
    NightNerd and kbird03 like this.

    The decision about what medical orders are initiated is solely up to the Physicians, family members cannot enter orders for medical tests, treatments, etc, so I'm not sure what you're referring to about the S.O. entering these orders. Ultimately it's up to the physician to determine if these tests and treatments are medically futile or if they are appropriate.

    As far as catheters in comfort care, that's based on a case by case assessment of whether or not this would bring the patient more comfort than discomfort.