Published
Is this the same California, the one in which half the people I know there have a 'medical marijuana' card, that just in 2012 determined that a first time DUI conviction is grounds to automatically revoke any nurse's license, or any teacher's certficate (rendering them all unemployable), to save the state the expense of giving them any due process? Hmm. makes me wonder, seriously, about the 'high' state of the Golden State. Ten steps forward, 45 back...
Is this the same California, the one in which half the people I know there have a 'medical marijuana' card, that just in 2012 determined that a first time DUI conviction is grounds to automatically revoke any nurse's license, or any teacher's certficate (rendering them all unemployable), to save the state the expense of giving them any due process? Hmm. makes me wonder, seriously, about the 'high' state of the Golden State. Ten steps forward, 45 back...
Sorry about your dissatisfaction with California but what have those issues got to do with NP's getting full practice independence and/or being discussed in the Nurse Practitioner Forum for that matter?
Is this the same California the one in which half the people I know there have a 'medical marijuana' card, that just in 2012 determined that a first time DUI conviction is grounds to automatically revoke any nurse's license, or any teacher's certficate (rendering them all unemployable), to save the state the expense of giving them any due process? Hmm. makes me wonder, seriously, about the 'high' state of the Golden State. Ten steps forward, 45 back...[/quote']My home state of PA has the same policy regarding nurses with DUI's losing their license. While it is a strict policy, I am sure it dissuades many people from drinking and driving. These people do get their "due process" in criminal court, but the BON does not make exception for first offenses. I personally think there are bigger issues (like NP's not being able to practice independently) to focus on than claiming a state is going backwards because they are tough on drinking and driving
without talking directly to anyone at CNA I'm assuming that the opposition stems from the fact that the bill would elevate NP's as independent providers, similar to physicians, hence would not be members of California nursing unions anymore.[/quote']But if they were still NP's that were employees of a hospital or larger healthcare organization, couldn't they still be members of the union? I understand if they are in independent practice and owning their own clinic that partaking of the union might not make sense
Corey Narry, MSN, RN, NP
8 Articles; 4,476 Posts
Join the California Association for Nurse Practitioners in garnering support for SB 491 (Hernandez), if passed, this is a substantial piece of legislation that would make our state part of the progressive group of states that allow for full practice rights to NP's without physician involvement.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/sen/sb_0451-0500/sb_491_bill_20130401_amended_sen_v98.htm