Jump to content
Additional Hardware Upgrades Read more... ×
jodispamodi jodispamodi (New Member)

Annoyed by commercial

Nurses   (6,904 Views 66 Comments)
2,607 Visitors; 230 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.
advertisement

Just venting... I heard a commercial this morning that aggravated the heck out of me. My state will be voting to add safe staffing measures to the upcoming ballot.

The commercial was to the effect of "Don't vote for safe staffing, it will cost healthcare billions, nurses should be allowed to decide safe staffing levels (meaning those that have gone to the dark side as staffing specialists).

As someone who worked on a super busy unit with an avg load of 5 patients, occ. six, and on one memorable occasion seven patients., I can attest to the fact that there was a HUGE difference on the (very) few occasions I had 4 patients. When I had 4 patients I felt I could critically think, thoroughly assess, and provide my patients with a good level of care. Five patients meant running all day and feeling guilty over the lack of time I had for the less needy ones.

Geez, if I had several million dollars I'd make my own commercial. Ok done venting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went to the committee reviewing our safe staffing bill, (state legislature), and testified about the difficulty in caring for that many people at once. I explained patient loads are nothing like they were 20 years ago. But of course, some "nurse" tesitified about the millions it would cost and very strongly implied it was only my union hospital that was complaining and how a law shouldn't be passed just for us. :mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really is amazing that only one state has been able to pass mandated ratios. I can't even imagine what nurses in other states go through. Almost every traveler that comes through the hospital (in California) is flabbergasted that we can't go out of ratios for lunch or 15 minute breaks, to the point that you will be paid extra for a missed meal or break if the charge nurse has patients and can't relieve you. I really hope it passes! If they want the nurses to decide safe staffing levels, ask the nurses to decide what it should be and then mandate it by law!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't fathom there are nurses who realistically believe that 5-7 patients is safe for ANYONE. Has anyone considered the cost in terms of reducing medication errors, sentinel events, falls, CAUTIS, CLABSIS, or the various other errors that occur related to unsafe nursing ratios?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't fathom there are nurses who realistically believe that 5-7 patients is safe for ANYONE. Has anyone considered the cost in terms of reducing medication errors, sentinel events, falls, CAUTIS, CLABSIS, or the various other errors that occur related to unsafe nursing ratios?

Sell-outs occur even in nursing. No matter how much money they waved at me (to testify those ratios are safe) I'd decline. Personally I'd rather keep my soul thank you very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course the money on the commercial could have been spent on better staffing in the first place...and people wonder why nurses burn out. Let's see, how many years will someone willingly drive to work each day and run around like a chicken with their head cut off for 12 hours (which is usually longer), drive home thankful that no one died because staffing was horrible, and repeat the same crazy crud day after day after day? Let me guess, we will be told there's a pill to help cope with that:-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In some regard we have only ourselves to blame. I have watched over the years as the responsibilities have increased and the supports have decreased and yet we continue to slog along like dutiful co-dependent women. Of course I know it isn't that simplistic but the overall outcome remains.

Thank you to those who are finally taking a stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just venting... I heard a commercial this morning that aggravated the heck out of me. My state will be voting to add safe staffing measures to the upcoming ballot.

The commercial was to the effect of "Don't vote for safe staffing, it will cost healthcare billions, nurses should be allowed to decide safe staffing levels (meaning those that have gone to the dark side as staffing specialists).

As someone who worked on a super busy unit with an avg load of 5 patients, occ. six, and on one memorable occasion seven patients., I can attest to the fact that there was a HUGE difference on the (very) few occasions I had 4 patients. When I had 4 patients I felt I could critically think, thoroughly assess, and provide my patients with a good level of care. Five patients meant running all day and feeling guilty over the lack of time I had for the less needy ones.

Geez, if I had several million dollars I'd make my own commercial. Ok done venting.

After safe staffing was signed into law California hospitals spent years tying it up in court stating they did not have money for nurses but had millions to fight it.

I think then Governor Gray Davis signed it in sans vote. I wouldn't let commercials get to you much, the same demographics who vote every time are also same in hospitals and are not likely stupid enough to believe that "I have the time" script.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"nurses should be allowed to decide safe staffing levels"[/Quote]

I would love for nurses to be allowed to determine safe staffing levels...didn't realize that was an option. :sarcastic: "Seven patients is unsafe, but I will take four of them."

Yeah, when pigs fly through a frozen hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in California and staffing ratios sure as hell don't apply in LTC. Having 20+ patients is unsafe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Genuine question: I know that it one of the states that has a staffing ratio up to vote, the ANA is opposing it. Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can bet that corporate health care has invested millions of dollars in payoffs, lawyers, and lobbyists to squelch these initiatives as soon as they arise-'follow the $$'. Though I'm hopeful, I'm also a realist and don't believe that this is something I'll see in my professional career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×