RN with medical marijuana card - page 5

Long time lurker here. So I have cancer. Papillary Carcinoma of my Thyroid. Diagnosed in 2011. I have one RAI treatment left to use and I am saving that in case it spreads to my bone, lung or... Read More

  1. by   SpankedInPittsburgh
    Yep, actually my CAPSTONE is on nurses who smoke. The hospitals are trying to save money on insurance premiums. Some are starting to fire nurses who smoke. Others refusing to hire them. Next up fatties. After that nurses who have contracted an sti. I just made up those last two but the same logic applies
  2. by   kbrn2002
    Quote from SpankedInPittsburgh
    Yep, actually my CAPSTONE is on nurses who smoke. The hospitals are trying to save money on insurance premiums. Some are starting to fire nurses who smoke. Others refusing to hire them. Next up fatties. After that nurses who have contracted an sti. I just made up those last two but the same logic applies
    I freely admit I smoke, heck over half the nurses I work with smoke. That is honestly one of the perks that keeps some staff working at our facility, it's smoker friendly. Employee smoking area right out the back door unlike the hospitals which require staff to leave the grounds. No silliness of requiring a negative nicotine test for employment. The health insurance used to have a program where premiums could be lowered by testing negative for nicotine and maintaining "good" numbers on some lab tests and being in a healthy BMI range. They stopped that 2 years ago because so few people agreed to participate.

    You are absolutely right though. In prohibition days alcohol was the evil force, now it's becoming tobacco. While it's still legal you sure wouldn't think so the way smokers can be treated. What's next? Employers refusing to hire overweight nurses due to the so called health risks? Maybe after that they can get away with not hiring certain ethnicities since they have a higher incidence of diabetes and high blood pressure, after all that sure increases their health risks and will make the insurance premiums higher for the rest of the employees if they have to cover people with all these increased health risks. I joke, maybe. I'd like to think such craziness will never come to pass but in the current political climate not much would surprise me.
  3. by   Horseshoe
    Quote from kbrn2002
    I freely admit I smoke, heck over half the nurses I work with smoke. That is honestly one of the perks that keeps some staff working at our facility, it's smoker friendly. Employee smoking area right out the back door unlike the hospitals which require staff to leave the grounds. No silliness of requiring a negative nicotine test for employment. The health insurance used to have a program where premiums could be lowered by testing negative for nicotine and maintaining "good" numbers on some lab tests and being in a healthy BMI range. They stopped that 2 years ago because so few people agreed to participate.

    You are absolutely right though. In prohibition days alcohol was the evil force, now it's becoming tobacco. While it's still legal you sure wouldn't think so the way smokers can be treated. What's next? Employers refusing to hire overweight nurses due to the so called health risks? Maybe after that they can get away with not hiring certain ethnicities since they have a higher incidence of diabetes and high blood pressure, after all that sure increases their health risks and will make the insurance premiums higher for the rest of the employees if they have to cover people with all these increased health risks. I joke, maybe. I'd like to think such craziness will never come to pass but in the current political climate not much would surprise me.
    Refusing to hire based on race is illegal. However, smokers, marijuana users, and obese people are not a protected class, so theoretically any of the above could be legally discriminated against.
  4. by   SpankedInPittsburgh
    Yeah here in Pennsylvania we are an "at will" state and our Supreme Court holds that an employee can be terminated for a good reason, a bad reason or no reason. If the employee is protected by an employment contract or this violates civil rights then the termination is not right and a civil suit can ensue. However, smokers are in no such protected class. Soon if some of you wish you can help me with my CAPSTONE by participating in a learning experience with a pre & post test. Happy Weekend all!!!
  5. by   Meriwhen
    Quote from youenjoymyself
    That is my intention. I am looking for something in case management/insurance side of things. This is really just food for thought.
    I'd agree, it seems like you'd have better luck in a role away from the bedside and/or direct patient care, and you can do this in managerial, insurance, educational, research...there's quite a few areas. But the hard part would be finding an employer, even one in such areas, willing to allow for your use and let any positive UDSes slide.

    Quote from youenjoymyself
    I did find this which looks promising to my plight and I can only hope PA yakes a similar stance:
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...l1ZGxL40JQ5Vmm
    Looks like NH isn't quite saying "No"...but it's also not a resounding "Yes" either. That verbiage leaves a lot of grey area, especially when it comes to defining exactly what "impaired" and "impairment" mean. I'd bet the cat that you, a prospective employer, and the BON will come up with 3 varying definitions of the terms. The question is, whose definition will win in a showdown...hint: likely the BON's as they control the licensure.
  6. by   SpankedInPittsburgh
    I think a lot of the marijuana issue goes beyond the BONs. Federal law still says that weed is illegal. Medicare is a federal program that many providers are dependent on & an employer who lets employees slide on the weed issue may place their funding in jeopardy should knowledge of that tolerance become public.
  7. by   youenjoymyself
    I wouldn't be taking CBD for pain, but for tumor reduction properties. I take bunch of homeopathic roots, oils, mushrooms, etc... since this tumor is currently inoperable.

    It's very unsettling to know you have a malignancy in your body and you aren't doing everything possible to reduce the chance of metastisies.
  8. by   Rocknurse
    Quote from youenjoymyself
    I wouldn't be taking CBD for pain, but for tumor reduction properties. I take bunch of homeopathic roots, oils, mushrooms, etc... since this tumor is currently inoperable.

    It's very unsettling to know you have a malignancy in your body and you aren't doing everything possible to reduce the chance of metastisies.
    I'm sorry to hear this. Perhaps you can use CBD isolate which contains no THC and therefore have the best of both worlds.
  9. by   billswife
    Quote from youenjoymyself
    Well, I am in the market for a new job and MMJ has just been implemented here in PA on 1/1/18. If I am just upfront with my employer and it is acceptable to them, maybe I should be in the clear?


    You might be, but unfortunately if a co-worker or a new manager decides to object to your use later on, I'm afraid you wouldn't be able to prevail. I'd hate to see that happen to you. If you DO decide to tell your employer and are hired with them knowing, I would make it a rule not to talk about it with co-workers. It only takes one spat with a fellow employee to make your work life uncomfortable.
  10. by   heez63
    You mention using topically, I wonder if this would even show up on a drug test? I'm not sure if this is true but I have heard that cannabis oil is different than regular dry herb marijuana, waxes and concentrates. I feel like it wouldn't have any psychoactive effects. Maybe not even show up on drug test??
  11. by   angeloublue22
    I work in Oregon where it is legal both recreationally and medically and here's how it works. Our BON has stated that using marijuana per se would not get your license revoked or put on you probation, but if you were working and your facility drug tested you and you were positive, they could report you to the border for practicing under the influence and then the BON could revoke your license and/or put you on probation. But if you were positive and the facility you work for is alright with you using marijuana or asks you to produce a script and they are okay with that, then it won't effect your license. I only know this because my father in law is a nurse and he ended up being positive for marijuana because he used it medically and our facility was fine with it. That is very rare though.
    Most facilities here in Oregon will especially forbid marijuana use by staff in the hiring paperwork. At my facility, we even get bi-yearly reminders that even though marijuana is legal we can still be fired and reported if we use it. One of our support staff recently almost got in trouble because she was using cannabis infused oil to rub on her hands due to arthritis and she loved it, but didn't know it would soak into your skin and make her positive. She self reported after she told me she was using it and I informed her of this. She didn't want to get caught accidently. They were nice about it because she didn't know and self reported. Poor lady, it was the only thing that helped.
  12. by   heez63
    As far as a drug test goes I have read that one you would get a false positive. So the UDS is a two part process. The first dipstick is an indicator of cannabanoids (I think, or something like that), in your system. You would probably fail that. Next part of the process is GC/MS (or something like that) it looks for the psychoactive part of weed, tetra Cannabinoid. So, I suppose you would ultimately pass a drug test. This is just speculation though. This topic really interests me and I was reading more into it after I saw your post.
  13. by   SobreRN
    If you have a card isn't that the equivalent of a prescription? I'm not sure, it is illegal under federal law though. May vary from workplace to workplace, I work in a county jail and was told in no uncertain terms it was illegal (although it is legal in Calif)
    I was never much interested in it when young, made me feel weird and paranoid so I likely would not use it for pain because I would find it much too mood-altering to work under the influence.

close