Can nurses be forced to work during pandemic

Purple_Scrubs, BSN, RN · May 7, 2009

In other words, you do what is required of you by the Governor of your state and his/her appointees, or lose your license. Such servitude hasn't been in place for civilians previously, except when natural disasters strike, and order needs to be reinstated. Trust for those in office will be mandatory, and non compliance punishable. Public needs will supercede individual rights.

Wow. If that means that I, as a school nurse with no recent hospital experience, am going to be commissioned to work in the hospitals (there is a reason I left the hospital setting, and I don't plan to return), then I am going to make my plan to get out of nursing for good. No one is going to take away my personal rights just because I chose nursing. Will MDs and other HCPs be held to the same standard? I find this terribly disturbing. "Do what we say or lose your license..." if that is the case I will hand mine over with a big pink bow on it!

lamazeteacher · May 7, 2009

Wow. If that means that I, as a school nurse with no recent hospital experience, am going to be commissioned to work in the hospitals (there is a reason I left the hospital setting, and I don't plan to return), then I am going to make my plan to get out of nursing for good. No one is going to take away my personal rights just because I chose nursing. Will MDs and other HCPs be held to the same standard? I find this terribly disturbing. "Do what we say or lose your license..." if that is the case I will hand mine over with a big pink bow on it!

I'm so sorry that you feel that way! I doubt that you'd be told to work in M/S, but Peds could be appropriate, with adequate orientation to med dosaging (however most hospitals have lists of nurses who recently retired that they could call upon)..... or vaccination clinics (giving injections is like getting on a bicycle after many years without doing that). It's not like starting IVs with the new equipment for that there is today.

The standards in the model are the same for all HCPs, including auxilliary personnel. What I get from your response, however, isn't an objection to the particular work you may be told to do, but the fact that you won't have a choice about whether you want to be drafted to do it. That's what made conscription so unpopular, and the registration of all 18 year old males in case it returns, is not favored.

It would be best, rather to think of it as you did when you worked on staff at a hospital, and couldn't have the exact time you wanted for your vacation. Others accompanying you, or those who you may have visited needed to adjust their vacation dates, so quite a few others may be affected by your work schedule. These times are unusual, but at least modern communication methods and treatments will lower the cost in lives lost. In 1918 there was little that could be done to prepare, test or treat the flu.

Please think clearly and as objectively as possible before you risk the professional career you enjoy which sustains you in the lifestyle you prefer. Angry reactions interfere with lifelong planning, and shouldn't be acted upon without thorough examination. You may find that the your anger is intensified by some earlier experience when you weren't given a choice.......:heartbeat

lamazeteacher · May 7, 2009

Hey- if "they" want to pay the astronomical costs for in-home childcare plus my salary in that situation? Sure- I'll probably do it. Otherwise- they can have my license because yes- my children are my first priority. Everyone else can have my service- and gladly- but ONLY once they (my children) are taken care of. And anyone who thinks that that is somehow a wrongful prioritization is IMO the one who needs to rethink their priorities.
Think about it- if a parent is worried about their child in a situation like that- how focused will they be on the task? If they are not focused on the task- how likely is it that mistakes will be made? If mistakes are made- how likely is it that someone could die?
The way you talk is as if one shouldn't go into nursing if they have children they recognize their responsibility for, and don't have family nearby who can devote an unspecified amount of time toward raising (since in a case like that who knows how long the situation would last or how many hours a day/week one would have to have them do this) or who can't afford the astronomical cost of in-home childcare (in situations like we are speaking of, there is a good chance that childcare facilities would be closed- or does the state have mandates that they are required to be open as well?) Nevermind whatever special requirements those who have children with special needs might face...
As for public need superceding individual right- well- sorry but I think that mindset is a load of crock. But then- I'm not a socialist. I think that the worst that should be able to happen in this situation is that if one leaves a job- they can't go back to that job and expect it to be there. This is healthcare- people are sick and dying every day. Everyone has their limits. People resign now for poor working conditions, family issues etc. A situation like we're talking here should be no different as far as being forced to work.

The situation we're contemplating is extreme - a public need greater than one's own, especially since it's medical and nursing care that is needed. Florence Nightingale is the very symbol of what nurses stand for, and did she shirk her duties? No, she went to Crimea (wherever that is now) and put her life on the line, as many American HCWs in the armed forces do today, and did yesterday, and will in the future. What you suggest is anarchy!

Somehow in this country whenever something is proposed that's for common good, and it's said by someone we didn't vote for, or we don't like, that nasty "s" word gets trotted out, as if it's the cross that will dispell the devil. The transparency Barack Obama promised allows the sharing of a model regarding the possibility of mandated participation of medical and nursing professionals, online, for all to see (and criticise). That allows time for preparations so whatever those professionals need done in their absence, can be in place in those extreme circumstances.

Socialists have no tenet requiring service for others, certainly not for the average working person to go above and beyond the call of duty! That might mean they weren't equal to each other, which is the heart of their political belief. Americans pay more for workers who go into hazardous situations, Communists do not. The difference between democracy/capitalism and socialism/communism, is purely economical. (Although communists tend to have more imperialist qualities if propaganda here can be believed, despite their rhetoric to the contrary.)

You entered your profession to serve others, didn't you? The only difference here, is the schedule, and that you won't be asked if it's OK with you. People normally are sick all the time, as you say, but a much greater proportion of the population will be needing professional care, if/when this Disaster Plan goes into effect (hopefully, it never will have to be enacted).

Fire fighters have regular work places and schedules too, but when a huge fire erupts at home or elsewhere, they have no choice but to go for wherever and however long they're needed. I haven't heard of their childcare being paid by their communities, when they're away longer than usual....... As I write this, units from all over California, Arizona, and Nevada are headed to Santa Barbara, CA to subdue flames there, and save people. Have you ever seen a firefighter (who remained one) say, "I don't wanna go?"

Equinox_93 · May 7, 2009

Yes- I'm just against forcing people to do things in these contexts on general principle. I tend to find that morale is higher and the job gets done much better/more efficiently/effectively when people WANT to be somewhere. I am wholly anti-conscription whether for war or nursing emergencies. I tend to believe that those who can generally will- when given proper incentive (decent salary, good working conditions, etc.) At the very least- I could at least stomach it were it done like jury duty- with excusable absences such as other unavoidable obligations. I'd be willing to bet that the number of people who would jump at the opportunity to work during situations like (pandemic, terrorist attack, etc.) would be very high if the government just handed out bonuses for doing the time. Money talks and they're great at printing it up when they want something. As with children, positive incentives tend to be far more effective than negative punishments. MHO.

I'm so sorry that you feel that way! I doubt that you'd be told to work in M/S, but Peds could be appropriate, with adequate orientation to med dosaging (however most hospitals have lists of nurses who recently retired that they could call upon)..... or vaccination clinics (giving injections is like getting on a bicycle after many years without doing that). It's not like starting IVs with the new equipment for that there is today.
The standards in the model are the same for all HCPs, including auxilliary personnel. What I get from your response, however, isn't an objection to the particular work you may be told to do, but the fact that you won't have a choice about whether you want to be drafted to do it. That's what made conscription so unpopular, and the registration of all 18 year old males in case it returns, is not favored.

Equinox_93 · May 7, 2009

I entered my profession to help others. Not necessarily to serve them. There is, IMO, a large difference. Florence Nightingale did not have children she was responsible for while she was doing her time as a nurse. Are you suggesting that mothers of young children should not be nurses? Or that they should abdicate their primary responsibility to their children in favor of their profession? Yes- there are extreme cases that we are talking about- however- that doesn't negate a mothers primary responsibility- to her children.

There are "needs greater than ones own" all across the world- even right now without pandemics, terrorism etc. Should all nurses go trotting the globe to wherever those needs may be simply because we chose to be in the medical profession??? Anarchy? No- just a reasonable sense of sanity.

If you feel so strongly about this- I assume you must have been in New Orleans after Katrina? And are probably still there given the dire need for nurses?

The situation we're talking about is extreme - a public need greater than one's own, especially since it's medical and nursing care that is needed. Florence Nightingale is the very symbol of what nurses stand for, and did she shirk her duties? No, she went to Crimea (wherever that is now) and put her life on the line, as many American HCWs in the armed forces do today, and did yesterday, and will in the future. What you suggest is anarchy!

HippyGreenPeaceChick · May 7, 2009

I could at least stomach it were it done like jury duty- with excusable absences such as other unavoidable obligations. I'd be willing to bet that the number of people who would jump at the opportunity to work during situations like (pandemic, terrorist attack, etc.) would be very high if the government just handed out bonuses for doing the time. Money talks and they're great at printing it up when they want something. As with children, positive incentives tend to be far more effective than negative punishments. MHO.

This seems to be such a negative opinion of our society. Saying we will only work in an emergency if "Bonuses" were paid out. Whether pandemic, or terrorist or even natural disasters I prefer to think we will will all pull together for the good of our community. Some old guy, I don't remember who said. You can be part of the problem or you can be part of the solution. I prefer to be part of the solution.

Equinox_93 · May 8, 2009

This seems to be such a negative opinion of our society. Saying we will only work in an emergency if "Bonuses" were paid out. Whether pandemic, or terrorist or even natural disasters I prefer to think we will will all pull together for the good of our community. Some old guy, I don't remember who said. You can be part of the problem or you can be part of the solution. I prefer to be part of the solution.

No- you are reading me wrong there. I am saying that if the options are between being forced to do something versus being given incentive to do something- it's more effective to give incentive.

Purple_Scrubs, BSN, RN · May 8, 2009

What I get from your response, however, isn't an objection to the particular work you may be told to do, but the fact that you won't have a choice about whether you want to be drafted to do it.

You are 100% right. In all honesty, since my main job as a school nurse would likely be on halt (we just closed for a week over the swine flu), I would probably volunteer to administer vaccines or something along those lines if the need was there. I might even work a peds floor with some mentorship. If nothing else I can help with ADLs while I get up to speed with floor nursing. But I would do neither of these unless I am provided with proper PPE, and the second that they mandate me to do it, I am going to start bucking. That is just my nature I guess. I am all about serving others (after my own safety needs are taken care of, I am good to no one if I am dead), but I want it done on my terms. If I am wrong for that, I can accept it.

I have really appreciated all the discussion about pandemics, and it has caused me to rethink my vocation. I love being a school nurse, and I know that I am good at what I do, but I am starting to think that the profession of nursing in general requires more personal sacrifice than I am willing to give (and I am talking about the bottom rungs of Maslow's hierarchy, I don't mind hard work or sacrificing "amenities" like vacation). There is a reason I did not choose the military, law enforcement or firefighting. I never before realized that nursing might require the same sacrifice of my personal freedoms as those professions. I think there are many young nurses who did not realize this. It is certainly not something they played up in nursing school!

talaxandra · May 8, 2009

I appreciate the positions of those who are concerned about what will happen to your loved ones if you work. On the other hand, who do you think will be looking after you or your family if pandemc influenza hits your home?

Trivia: the Autonomous Republic of Crimea occupies a penninsula off the coast of the Black Sea and is both independent (has a parliament) but operates under Ukrainian law.

HippyGreenPeaceChick · May 8, 2009

No- you are reading me wrong there. I am saying that if the options are between being forced to do something versus being given incentive to do something- it's more effective to give incentive.

Looking at your response here, No I did not read your position wrong at all. There are times in this world where we as individuals must put our needs as secondary to the needs of society in times of emergency.

Another great man once said " Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country".

Equinox_93 · May 8, 2009

Looking at your response here, No I did not read your position wrong at all. There are times in this world where we as individuals must put our needs as secondary to the needs of society in times of emergency.
Another great man once said " Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country".

IMO there are ways that those trained in healthcare professions can help out HUGELY but independantly- not clocking hours at their place of employment. Just because I am not in support of mandatory service due to career choice, and would not choose to be tied to a hospital without recourse in the event of an emergency doesn't mean I would necessarily huddle down in my basement and avoid contact with the outside world. In such an emergency situation, there would be MANY MANY MANY people who would not have access to hospitals or other places where I might be employed. Being active in my community to the extent that I am able given my other obligations to my family is something that I am certainly not opposed to. So yes- you DID read me wrong.

What I think alot of people aren't understanding here is that in situations such as a highly fatal pandemic strain or terrorist threat etc. there may well be no going home. There may be quarantine where people LIVE at the hospital or facility for an unknown time frame. There may be martial law imposed where going to/from work *may* be compromised. I'm not giving over my small children to a neighbor or a nanny for an unknown time frame "for the greater good". The degree of emergency mentioned here I'm not seeing as something where you can maintain your 8 or 12hr shift and then go home on a regular basis.

Equinox_93 · May 8, 2009

i appreciate the positions of those who are concerned about what will happen to your loved ones if you work. on the other hand, who do you think will be looking after you or your family if pandemc influenza hits your home?

i would be looking out for my child/family. if i were working- that would be all i would be thinking about and wouldn't be at all effective. small children need their parents if they're sick. further, if it were a pandemic issue, quarantine would be in effect. if my child caught the pandemic strain- we would be quarantined in our home and you better believe i'd be there with my child. it makes no sense to go to work and expose my patients and coworkers to whatever pandemic illness has hit my home.

the way you talk it's as if parents of small children should just be prepared to let the nanny raise them if "the public" is in need. or are you saying that parents of small children shouldn't work in healthcare?

to me- prioritizing my family while the kids are small is expected, normal and right. once they're grown- then those priorities can shift. i'm honestly surprised that anyone would think otherwise. but- different strokes, i guess.