A Call to Action from the Nation's Nurses in the Wake of Newtown

allnurses Guide · Dec 22, 2012

People with mental health issues have been around forever. Why are we seeing these problems now? .

This is what my husband and I have been discussing. I'm interested in figuring out what is different now.

He grew up in a rural area where kids learned to shoot and hunt from a young age. Teens who could drive often left home early to get in some hunting before heading to school and pickups were parked in school parking lots with shotguns in the gun rack in the back window. Guns were easily available in the 1950's and 1960's and yet, school shootings were not common.

I grew up 4 years behind him and in So. Cal but firearms were part of my childhood as well.

What has changed in society that makes people go off the deep end and do things like Adam Lanzo did last week?

I don't think access to guns is the reason . . . because access to guns has gotten harder than when my husband and I grew up.

What has changed?

InfirmiereJolie · Dec 22, 2012

I realize that gun ownership is a constitutional right, and I have no objections to anyone owning a musket and making their own ammunition for them. This was the weapon available when the second ammendment was signed.

I liked this comment because of this sentence!

We are not talking about little small muskets we are talking about massive killing machines!

We do not these out on the streets and I read IndiCRNA's comment that it didn't do anything. Over the summer around the time of the Colorado shooting I talked to someone who said the item used was basically the same he used when in the military, but just SLIGHTLY different. He strongly was for this ban of these massive killing machines!!

We need these gone!

(Merry Christmas and God Bless)

TopazLover, BSN, RN · Dec 22, 2012

I owe many of you an apology. When i said "no child" you are right I left out the word unsupervised. That was what I meant. I encouraged my DGS to learn how to shoot. One of his parent's friends have a son who was shot in the head by a friend playing with a gun. i felt he needed to learn appropriate use of guns.

I read how most people who have guns have education but that is not really true. Yes, hunter safety is great. But it does not teach many things that someone who is using a gun as personal protection needs to know. i took the CCW course. I know what is included. i also know most people I ran into at the range had never taken a course. Unless they were military they learned from someone else. I am not saying they were bad, I am saying they were allowed as are many others who have guns without proper understanding of them.

My DSis used to be the Town Justice. During hunting season her court room was filled with people who were carrying loaded weapons in their cars. Totally illegal. When she would ask why, an answer she got more than once was " _________ loaded it before I left the city. I don't know how to load it exactly". I wish I had made this up. Not every gun owner is as conscientious as the people who are responding here. i respect those who respect guns and their good and bad points.

Home Health Columnist / Guide · Dec 22, 2012

Marion Wright Edelman sums it up better than I

Marian Wright Edelman: It Is Time to Act to Protect Children Against Gun Violence

Right now the pervasive culture of violence in America only reinforces the sense of threat both children and adults feel. This year's Black Friday shopping set a record for gun sales: The FBI reported 154,873 requests for background checks from shoppers wanting to buy guns on the day after Thanksgiving alone. Those numbers are not about what many people think of as the "criminal" gun culture involving guns bought and sold on the streets. These are the guns being sold to the millions of Americans who are willing and able to go through background checks and follow all existing laws and proper legal channels so that they can either buy guns for their own pleasure or their own theoretical protection. It appears the Newtown shooter's mother fell into this very large category of Americans. There were 16.8 million background checks in 2012, nearly double the number 10 years ago. What is it about American culture that encourages tens of millions of Americans to either use guns as a form of entertainment or feel so fearful they believe they need guns in their homes, including semiautomatic weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips designed specifically to kill large numbers of other people, to feel a sense of safety?
Why are we so terrified of one other, even during periods when actual crime rates go down? There is an obvious connection between that feeling of terror and the culture of violence that saturates Americans in violent language, violent imagery, and violent entertainment. Right now, instead of responding as parents and a nation by saying no to the culture of violence, we are apparently responding by defensively arming ourselves with more and bigger weapons. If that cycle of violence and fear is having such a deep psychological impact on adults, how do we expect our children to navigate or survive it?
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence reports a gun in the home is more likely to be used in a homicide, suicide, or unintentional shooting than it is to be used in self-defense, and other studies have found guns in a home are more likely to kill or injure a family member or friend than a stranger. Guns lethalize anger and despair. Gun owners who know these facts seem to either discredit the research behind them or hold to the belief their own guns and families would certainly be the exception. If the Newtown shooter's mother knew those risks she likely felt the same way. In fact, if her son had only used her guns to kill her or kill himself, it would have been an outcome that would never have been national news. Instead, the weapons she apparently chose to buy and bring into her home were used to kill her, her child, and 26 other people who were all somebody else's mother, child, or both.

kcmylorn · Dec 22, 2012

I am just opininionating here- I read yesterday, that kid's mother also grew up around guns. She was described as being from a "gun culture". She grew up in New Hampshire- which has many rural areas. The paternal side of my family is from NH and still exclusively lives there. I was not from NH. I grew up and have lived all my life in suburban metro areas- It would be out of character for me to have any kind of gun. For that kid's mom- it was not. She was a "stock broker" and then a SAHM. But she did have a mentally unstable fragile kid living in the same house with her and the guns. It has also been reported, she tried to help and had the means to do so. I don't think she was on her A game and excerised good judgement about a gun access in the house with a mentally unstable fragile kid. For her guns in the house were normal. I would be very interested to find out when she bought those guns.

I think this still goes back to the "root cause" -- the mental illness. I wonder while we are assuming that since she had considerable means to obtain and provide this mental healthcare, what was the quality of mental healthcare he received? I don't think high priced care, necessarily means quality care. It was also written that she was planning on moving out to Washington state to seek care for him,that she was with growing concern for him per her interviewed friends, that the kid dressed in the same green shirt and khaki pants every day when in high school per his interviewed former class mates, he was a computer wiz( per his former class mates and high school teachers) and his computer at the house was destroyed, possibly beyond investigators being able to put back together. The custody terms of the divorce was( as reported by the AP press) the kid lived with mom and what ever her decision was about kid's care was the decision. The kid has not been in contact with dad for a few years. It sounds to me like dad signed away his parental rights to that kid over to the mom during the divorce- dad's abandoment, rejection and now mom wants to move to a diferent state-a disruption in a daily routine in some one who wears the same clothes day in and day out. Isn't that a psychiatric disease?

I don't think gun laws are going to solve this problem.

Laurie52 · Dec 22, 2012

It sounds to me like dad signed away his parental rights to that kid over to the mom during the divorce- dad's abandoment, rejection

Everything that I have read said that Adam cut off any contact with his father and older brother. I think that this was a very trouble boy for a very long time. This is proboably not the child I would teach to shoot and would not have guns in the house while he was there. Locked up or not, he clearly was able to access them.

allnurses Guide · Dec 23, 2012

Time to Act Now To Restore Our Ravaged Mental Healthcare System
by Deborah Burger
Registered nurses across the country mourn the loss of life marked by the shooting of innocents in Connecticut. This should be a clear wake up call for the White House, Congress, and state and local legislators to take action to address causes of the violence, including restoring the devastating cuts that have occurred to mental health services across the U.S.
Every day a massive tragedy is being played out on a smaller scale everyday in emergency rooms, in mental health facilities, and on the streets across our country, where, with sometimes devastating consequences, mental health is underfunded to a shocking, and sometimes deadly degree. ...
... Members of National Nurses United, the nation's largest organization of nurses, say it is time to act with both short term and long term responses. It is incumbent on all of us to:
Demand private healthcare systems reverse the pervasive cuts to mental health services, especially by profit-focused institutions which view mental health as an easy target for cuts because it is less profitable and has fewer public advocates.
Increase federal, state and local funding of public mental health programs and public health clinics, which play a crucial role in identifying persons with potentially violent mental health problems.
Require health insurance companies to provide full coverage for mental health services, and require parity in mental health coverage with other health services.
Restore school nurses and counselors who are frequently a first target of school budget cuts.
Challenge the stigma of mental health that undermines mental health programs and stigmatizes people needing mental health care, the overwhelming majority of whom are not violent.
Guarantee health care for everyone, including mental health services, based on patient need, not ability to pay, as in improving and expanding Medicare to cover everyone.
Sadly, this growing emergency comes as no surprise to America's nurses who are on the front line of our nation's mental health crisis. ...
... Evidence is in on the mental health crisis (please read further)
Time to Act Now To Restore Our Ravaged Mental Healthcare System | Common Dreams

The National Nurses United (NNU) officers and board voted to approve the above.

I can only guess why they didn't mention weapons. My guess is that:

In California and probably other states we already had a position on restoring our public health system that included mental healthcare.

Any attempt to regulate the sale of firearms causes some to assume that someone wants to take away all guns.

Since the little innocent children were killed there are plans to again try to regulate them I think nurses can choose to take sides as they think best.

I do think a discussion and action to improve mentasl healthcare is needed.

Mental illness is not new. I hope we can do better.

BBC Documentary on some history of mental health care:

[video=youtube;tpr7bq2dV-8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpr7bq2dV-8

InfirmiereJolie · Dec 23, 2012

Why is it we always talk about mental health care, NRA fans useing to avoid the topic of assult weapon bans? Many people who use these semi-automatic weapons are not mental. They claim they are mental for their defense cases, but otherwise their scheming/planning certainly is not by a person who cannot think, but someone who knows what they are doing, coldly. They are simply this - cold.

By focusing on mental illness, this simply ignores the problem that these weapons are on the street and being used by legitimate planners. You cannot ban all violent TV or shows, this is unreasonable. Further, you cannot expect to give counseling and expect this alone is enough. Many of these same people had been seen by counselors and phychologists beforehand - it didn't stop them. Even those who were not, would it have really stopped them? Unlikely, as it seems they knew exactly what they were doing, planning it, and the history of these attacks disproves it.

No matter how many times this comes up, mental health planning is not going to stop it. The history of people getting spoken to and doing it anyway disproves it.

PMFB-RN, RN · Dec 23, 2012

I realize that gun ownership is a constitutional right, and I have no objections to anyone owning a musket and making their own ammunition for them. This was the weapon available when the second ammendment was signed.

Ya sure. Since paper, pen and the printing press were the only form of media available when the 1st Ammendment came about we should ban radio, TV and the internet. After all the internet provides a medium for the rapid disimination of child Media and makes possible the spreading of terrorists ideologies. Certainly cell phones must be banned since there weren't around when the constitution was signed and they are often used to detonate IEDs and murder people.

Sheesh, your logic sort of freaks me out.

HM-8404, BSN, RN · Dec 23, 2012

This is the basis of the it's-a-slippery-slope argument, where Fear-Mongers afraid of the government taking all of your weapons away justifies ANY and all weapons being available to normal average citizens no matter how dangerous or how ridiculous!!! Fortunately, you guys (to include the NRA that is only in business to support the GUN MANUFACTURERS and not the Second Amendment, which does not protect the need for assault weapons in the hands of civilians) are not going to get away with pushing this garbage argument this time. Especially not after 20 babies were killed and everyone in this country and around the world was paying attention.

Assault weapons and high capacity clips are not necessary for CIVILIANS of any kind to own. There is not a single civilian that needs access to these things to hunt for sport because they are mass people killers and have no other use!
By the way, not everyone who kills people is mentally ill! So, keeping these weapons out of the hands of mentally ill will not solve the problem of preventing the next mass shooting... This argument just kicks-the-can-down-the-road and distracts from the need to remove access of high capacity clips and assault weapons out of the hands of ALL civilians, just like the NRA and Gun Manufacturers wants.

A little information for people that know less about guns than they think they do... Any magazine in an assault style weapon can be changed in less than 5 seconds. So is there really a difference if a shooter has a 30 round magazine or 3 10 round magazines. When will people start blaming the real cause of these incidence, crazy evil people.

InfirmiereJolie · Dec 23, 2012

Ya sure. Since paper, pen and the printing press were the only form of media available when the 1st Ammendment came about we should ban radio, TV and the internet. After all the internet provides a medium for the rapid disimination of child Media and makes possible the spreading of terrorists ideologies. Certainly cell phones must be banned since there weren't around when the constitution was signed and they are often used to detonate IEDs and murder people.
Sheesh, your logic sort of freaks me out.

"Paper, pens, printing presses, radio, TV, the internet, cell phones" are NOT used to kill people as or be massive weapons. There is NO logic in this spiral argument. Guns (especially the semi-automatic kind) are PRIMARILY used to injure or kill another living thing. This is there #1 meaning. The others cannot be used for this without GREAT STRAIN and basically, pointless.

InfirmiereJolie · Dec 23, 2012

A little information for people that know less about guns than they think they do... Any magazine in an assault style weapon can be changed in less than 5 seconds. So is there really a difference if a shooter has a 30 round magazine or 3 10 round magazines. When will people start blaming the real cause of these incidence, crazy evil people.

Not if you ban assault weapons. Do you REALLY want to go up against one? I don't think so.

Are you REALLY going to use an assault weapon for hunting deer, rabbits, ect.? NO. It is NOT USEFUL. You can do it without a semi-automatic weapon. There is no use for these weapons except for NON-RECREATIONAL use AKA killing massive amounts of people.

I don't understand why nurses WOULDN'T be for a ban of assault weapons. Afterall, nurses are the ones who has to care for the injured after all of this. They would want LESS people dieing and going to the hospital, wouldn't they? This is caring.

A Call to Action from the Nation's Nurses in the Wake of Newtown

Nurses: Do You Support a Call to Action in the Wake of Newtown + other shootings