Jay Leno slams nurses!

[grace90]

I *just* watched Jay Leno make a really rude comment about nurses- it went something to the effect of... " you know nurses are the most overworked profession in America... especially in those adult movies" GRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!

Nurses are not Bimbos, Mr. Leno!!!!!! :angryfire :angryfire :angryfire :nurse: :flamesonb :flamesonb

[Thunderwolf, MSN, RN]

Just had a staff discussion regarding this thread. The staff discussed and voted to keep thread open. It has generated a lot of discussion and will probably do so. In saying that, I appreciate the 3 votes thus far, but it will remain open for others to add continued thoughts and opinions. My only recommendation is to keep it on topic...Jay Leno slamming nurses in his jokes on TV.

Thanks, everyone.

[rsh3rn]

I know its off topic but we're nurses we do not diagnose CHF, or anything of the sort. I know where you are coming from here, but .......

Also how can the public possibly percieve nursing when nursing as a whole has no agreement on what that perception should be?

He's just repeating a common cultural stereotype.

But think about this. How many times in how many ways do you 'hide in the wings'. You don't say what you know, you hint until the doctor gets what you are saying. You don't call the doc and say 'Mrs. Smith is going into CHF and needs some lasix and O2' - you say 'Mrs. Smith's sats are dropping and her lungs sound wet' etc. etc. until the doc orders the things you knew she needed when you made the call. Then, the perception of both the doc and the public is that - the doc came in to save the day. Even if you tell the family that actions were taken to save Mrs. Smith, it's normally couched as 'I called the doc and got some orders'. Wow, her doc really saved the day!

[Thunderwolf, MSN, RN]

Perhaps this topic has run its course. I don't know. It's just sad that when a few questionable posters hijack a thread, we let them. Why should this thread (or any other that hasn't become an unsalvageable free-for-all) be shut down? Why aren't the offenders shown the virtual door and blocked from re-entering that topic?

I'm not sure this topic has much life left in it, but I still would rather see it die of exhaustion and inattention than have the unsanctioned actions of an ill-manered minority be allowed to kill it.

Agreed.........

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

thats hilarious!

lighten up

I have had to deal with the gaylord fokker thing, should i bow up everytime someone brings it up? sheesh

I have my opinion on when someone tells another one to "lighten up". It's in this thread somewhere, so I'll lighten up and not repeat myself.

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

Perhaps this topic has run its course. I don't know. It's just sad that when a few questionable posters hijack a thread, we let them. Why should this thread (or any other that hasn't become an unsalvageable free-for-all) be shut down? Why aren't the offenders shown the virtual door and blocked from re-entering that topic?

I'm not sure this topic has much life left in it, but I still would rather see it die of exhaustion and inattention than have the unsanctioned actions of an ill-manered minority be allowed to kill it.

I agree. I've voiced my opinion several times to the mods for prematurely closing down threads.

I also don't like it when we're told to stay on topic, I say let threads live a natural life, on topic or not, as long as TOS haven't been violated, then die a natural death.

[Thunderwolf, MSN, RN]

I know its off topic but we're nurses we do not diagnose CHF, or anything of the sort. I know where you are coming from here, but .......

Also how can the public possibly percieve nursing when nursing as a whole has no agreement on what that perception should be?

He's just repeating a common cultural stereotype.

rsh3rn says:

But think about this. How many times in how many ways do you 'hide in the wings'. You don't say what you know, you hint until the doctor gets what you are saying. You don’t call the doc and say ‘Mrs. Smith is going into CHF and needs some lasix and O2’ – you say ‘Mrs. Smith’s sats are dropping and her lungs sound wet’ etc. etc. until the doc orders the things you knew she needed when you made the call. Then, the perception of both the doc and the public is that – the doc came in to save the day. Even if you tell the family that actions were taken to save Mrs. Smith, it’s normally couched as ‘I called the doc and got some orders’. Wow, her doc really saved the day!

You hit the larger scope of the problem...perception as to what nursing is and what we do. Nursing theorists have tried to figure that one out for decades. But, it probably entails a Unified theory or Grand theory which encompasses most of them. Still, it doesn't translate well to us, the docs, or the public. That is the major difficulty...making it practical and precise for all to finally come to agreement..."Ah ha, that's what nursing is and what nursing does." I'm afraid most folks can't wait that long till that happens, if not lose general interest all together. But, until that time, getting credit where credit is due may be long in coming. Just a long winded way in saying "I agree with you."

[rn/writer, RN]

you hit the larger scope of the problem...perception as to what nursing is and what we do. nursing theorists have tried to figure that one out for decades. but, it probably entails a unified theory or grand theory which encompasses most of them. still, it doesn't translate well to us, the docs, or the public. that is the major difficulty...making it practical and precise for all to finally come to agreement..."ah ha, that's what nursing is and what nursing does." i'm afraid most folks can't wait that long till that happens, if not lose general interest all together. but, until that time, getting credit where credit is due may be long in coming. just a long winded way in saying "i agree with you."

because there are so many aspects to nursing--specialty areas, training levels, practice sites, care plans, goals, etc.--trying to define nursing is like trying to define a gender or a race or a religion or any other huge group of individuals. in order to cover the immensity of the subject, your definition, by necessity, ends up being so vague as to be of little use.

although it's only a starting point, i have had a bit of success when i explain that doctors (the group we're most commonly compared to) use a medical model and focus on treating diseases and injuries, while nurses care for patients. doctors often care about their patients, but nurses provide care for them whether this is in a hospital setting, a school, a residential facility, or a private home. in many ways, we build the bridge--heck, we are the bridge--between the patients and their health. docs prescribe. we implement.

[Thunderwolf, MSN, RN]

i agree. i've voiced my opinion several times to the mods for prematurely closing down threads.

i also don't like it when we're told to stay on topic, i say let threads live a natural life, on topic or not, as long as tos haven't been violated, then die a natural death.

tweety, i agree with you. since being a mod, i've probably closed no more than 3-4, much when folks don't play nice. however, i tend to ask permission, 9 times out of 10, the members who frequent it, especially if it is the original poster who requests, whether a thread has lived its life and needs closure. apparently, this thread has a little life yet in it. sorry if "staying on topic" has bothered you. don't mean it to. i will attempt to say it much less. i tend to agree now that threads should live their lives, where ever they stray, then die their well deserved deaths via inattention. i agree with you, tweety. "the topic" is what gets the discussion going and focused for awhile, but it is the members who eventually decide whether it is worth talking about any more or not. you made very good points. i want you to know that i have listened and heard you. thank you for your comments.

now, let the thread continue (hmmm, this does sound better!)

:wink2:

[rn/writer, RN]

intensity can be intimidating, but it doesn't have to be viewed as wrong. i do think that sometimes shutting down a thread is done as a pre-emptive move, but that seems a premature and unnecessary measure with adults.

the problem is that it can be a very thin line between intensity and flaming. most of the time, it is not the case. in fact, i have provided thanks on the board when members do settle disagreements amongst themselves. some times, i have to pm others, not just receive them. the tos binds us all. i have to review it often, get feedback from staff, and communicate it in how i attempt to mod. this is no easy task.

as i said above, i'd rather see the offenders shut down than the thread itself. is there a way to block posters from a single thread? or can you suspend their privileges and give them a time out?

there are ways to sanction, yes (warning points)...but not to block a member from any one particular thread. you have the power though to use your ignore button (user cp) on any particular member who rubs you the wrong way...you won't see his/her posts. threads are given time outs as a way of cooling, then reopened. significant infractions of tos can warrant being in moderation for awhile (the person's posts are dumped in a bin of sorts and released if meet criteria). lastly, gross or repetitive infractions can warrant banning. however, i believe, as a mod, that we are adults and can work through it 9 times out of 10, preventing further difficulties.

thanks for moderating. i think i speak for most of us when i say we appreciate the time and efforts you guys put in to make this such an excellent forum.

believe it or not, it has become almost a second job for me...but, i love it. i believe we have a most excellent board here for us. i'm commited to it. we have our differences, we all are learning, and we can all come together to resolve issues as they occur. i rely on you and the rest of the members to keep the board in its excellence...to self mod and to assist others...even when things become intense. believe me, i thank you.

so, that being said, "on with the thread."

______________________

please note: the text in red is thunderwolf's replies to rn/writer's quotes above. wolfie

[Thunderwolf, MSN, RN]

because there are so many aspects to nursing--specialty areas, training levels, practice sites, care plans, goals, etc.--trying to define nursing is like trying to define a gender or a race or a religion or any other huge group of individuals. in order to cover the immensity of the subject, your definition, by necessity, ends up being so vague as to be of little use.

although it's only a starting point, i have had a bit of success when i explain that doctors (the group we're most commonly compared to) use a medical model and focus on treating diseases and injuries, while nurses care for patients. doctors often care about their patients, but nurses provide care for them whether this is in a hospital setting, a school, a residential facility, or a private home. in many ways, we build the bridge--heck, we are the bridge--between the patients and their health. docs prescribe. we implement (care...i added it here).

this issue of "care" has been what we are attributed with, as nurses, in providing...but, still remains vaguely ill defined by our profession. care?...what is it?

it has been what the theorists have been wrangling around with for years. however, the catch 22 is is that the more it is defined, the vaguer it becomes. nurses provide care...but, what does that really mean? the general public doesn't know and, most of the time, we think we actually do know what this means. but, the long and short of it is, the phrase of "providing care" hasn't served us very well as a profession. the danger of this is, quite often, is that we have left other disciplines to define who and what we are...most noteably, medicine and management.__________________

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

sorry if "staying on topic" has bothered you. don't mean it to. i will attempt to say it much less. i tend to agree now that threads should live their lives, where ever they stray, then die their well deserved deaths via inattention. i agree with you, tweety. "the topic" is what gets the discussion going and focused for awhile, but it is the members who eventually decide whether it is worth talking about any more or not. you made very good points. i want you to know that i have listened and heard you. thank you for your comments.

now, let the thread continue (hmmm, this does sound better!)

:wink2:

wolfie, you're doing a fantastic job and i wasn't really thinking of you or anyone in particular when i made that statement. i would pm you with any personal problems i have with you. :)

i think in every day conversation people stray from the topic to topic when they talk and it's natural that's it's going to happen on a thread. i think the problem is when the off-topic is offensive, such as a political remark or a homophobic remark, and it's sours the thread a bit. but again, if it's within the tos, i still would like things to progress naturally, even if opinions and reactions are strong.

i'm not a mod, and certainly can't tell you or anyone else how to mod. just putting in my two cents as always. lol

[Thunderwolf, MSN, RN]

Thanks, Tweety. You know I value your input.

Wolfie