Help me bring this into the public!

Horseshoe, BSN, RN · Oct 30, 2014

What is so ******* uncivil about staying at home. They are willing to attend to your every need and want, so what is so inhumane?

Who is "they" and where do you get the idea that all of the healthy, quarantined healthcare workers returning from Africa are going to have people going to their homes to "attend to every need and want?"

Mr. Duncan was symptomatic for two days before he even went to the ER the first time, and for two more days before he was admitted to the hospital. 43 people came into contact with him after he became symptomatic, not including the HCW who interfaced with him at the first ER visit. NONE have become ill. NOT ONE OF THEM. If people are contagious the very minute or even first hours after having a fever, why has NOT ONE of Mr. Duncan's contacts become ill? If a newly symptomatic person is so contagious that it justifies forcible quarantine even before they show symptoms, there should have been at least a few infected contacts. There were MANY people around Amber Vinson when she was experiencing early ebola symptoms. WHy haven't we seen any people infected, considering the numbers of people around her?

Your fears have not been borne out by practical experience. Just because you wouldn't mind being shut inside your home and not allowed to so much as step outside when you are not displaying any symptoms of illness has not one thing to do with whether or not someone else should feel the same.

FLAlleycat · Oct 30, 2014

" . . . What's crazy is the hospital does this all the time to patients. How many times have we argued with patients about not leaving the floor, or not to take their personal medications, or not to smoke in their rooms, or not to eat when they are NPO, or that we're not disclosing the results of their test because the physician has not spoken with them first, or restricting visitation because their family is worrisome. To be honest, we as nurses violate the simplest of civil rights each day at the hospital because the patient has a right to all of these things. Yet, civil rights only become an issue when it is done to us? Be for real. . . ."

What scares me is that you can't see the difference between a patient in the hospital being told to be NPO before surgery and the forced quarantine of this nurse. That doesn't even take critical thinking.

Cheyenne RN,BSHS · Oct 30, 2014

Truth is, Macawake (please insert generous amounts of sarcasm here). . .
It's probably safer to just go ahead and off her (tongue in cheek). In fact, I think I have a solution for the African Ebola problem!! In fact, for all problems that distress white Americans!!
taking a deep breath now. . .

:wideyed: :nailbiting: :sorry: :roflmao: Oh dear oh dear.. ..now you've gone and done it. You went off topic.....and then insinuated a tad of possible....I may be wrong...but possible racism.. :no: ..some things are better left unsaid. Even tongue in cheek. naughty. just plum naughty.

Ruby Vee, BSN · Oct 31, 2014

The CDC and her state health department are hardly "non-healthcare" people.

Well, the CDC has certainly demonstrated an ability to get things wrong!

FLAlleycat · Oct 31, 2014

. . . They tried her method of letting asymptotic people run free and self report, until three people actually later developed the disease while out and about. Three, IMO, is too many.

But this demonstrates exactly that self-monitoring does indeed work!

Ruby Vee, BSN · Oct 31, 2014

Horseshoe I read it and I saw that. I don't disagree with it. I'm saying, what if she is out and about and begins to develop symptoms around your loved one? Unless she has a thermometer in her mouth 24hrs out of the day, she is going to have a hard time determining exactly when she developed a fever (if she develops one). There are way too many what ifs when the logical thing to do is keep the exposed person at home until there's an all clear. It seems like a ridiculous thing to chance when it can be contained at home for a defined period. Why risk lives, money, and time when it can be contained at home. CONTAINED AT HOME. What is so ******* uncivil about staying at home. They are willing to attend to your every need and want, so what is so inhumane? Why risk lives if this disease can transition at the drop of a dime. Why not stay at home? And Tiff you're right about the mortality rate in the US, but what happens if someone who has a compromised immune system contracts it. What happens if pregnant women contract it. And the people that did contract it were wearing PPE. I don't know too many people who aren't nurses that have an isolation gown, mask, gloves, and hazmat suit lying around. Why gamble with uncertainty when there is a least costly alternative to passive-aggressively monitoring people and that's STAYING AT HOME. I personally am not scared of Ebola, but I do not want my family to be exposed. I do not want to chance my children's health with an unknown disease because of this bratty nurse. People will disagree, it's human nature. But, I will not sit idly by and let this woman potentially start a chain reaction that could potentially have deadly consequences because her state's law are not fitting to her. If it is a requirement for healthcare workers who are directly exposed to ebola to be quarantined until clear, so be it. Like I said before, if the thought of actually catching Ebola didn't deter you, I highly doubt a quarantine will. Keeping her in a tent, I felt, was overkill. But allowing her to be in her home with comfort I feel is more than compromising. They tried her method of letting asymptotic people run free and self report, until three people actually later developed the disease while out and about. Three, IMO, is too many. One would have been good enough to put the hammer down and say "you know what, let's let them stay at home the duration of the 21 days so that we don't unnecessarily jeopardize lives." Like I said before, IF she breaks the law, she should be punished just as any other law abiding citizen. And the fact that she is comfortable with roaming while admitting to being uncertain herself speaks VOLUMES about her character. I personally, would hands down volunteer to be quarantined because I would be distraught if I unintentionally infected someone.

Paragraphs, please. Paragraphs!

What is uncivil is forcing someone to quarantine themselves because other people -- people who know very little about ebola or whatever infectious disease we're discussing -- are frightened. And who exactly is this "they" who are willing to attend to your every need and want while you're being forced to stay in your home?

Bottom line is that no one in the US contracted the disease except for health care workers who have been in direct contact with an infected person's body fluids. If your scared, stay out of people's body fluids.

And use paragraphs please.

Cheyenne RN,BSHS · Oct 31, 2014

One should lose their nursing license for being bullheaded? One should lose their license for not behaving in the same manner as you would?
It's one thing to disagree with this nurse and quite another to demand that she lose her nursing license because she doesn't allow herself to be bullied by politicians pandering to public fear or doesn't see things the same way as ourselves.
If every nurse who was stood up against perceived injustice lost their ability to practice, we'd lose a lot of amazing, valuable nurses in our profession.

I won't be signing the petition but I still don't agree with how blatantly rebellious KC is acting. There are right ways and wrong ways to make a point. She could get on blogs, write her congressmen, do things to bring about change so others would not have to go through it but she is acting like a 2 year old thumbing her nose at the legal system acting as if she is above the law and just too good to obey the quarantine. She is thumping her nose at them acting like she knows way much more than everyone else . I don't know how anyone else feels but I truly am embarrassed at her flagrant disregard for the law.Change things the right way, not this stomping your foot and saying "naner naner boo boo. Im not gonna stay in quarantine anyplace you put me, and that big old state government can't make me"

macawake, MSN · Oct 31, 2014

I won't be signing the petition but I still don't agree with how blatantly rebellious KC is acting. There are right ways and wrong ways to make a point. She could get on blogs, write her congressmen, do things to bring about change so others would not have to go through it but she is acting like a 2 year old thumbing her nose at the legal system acting as if she is above the law and just too good to obey the quarantine. She is thumping her nose at them acting like she knows way much more than everyone else . I don't know how anyone else feels but I truly am embarrassed at her flagrant disregard for the law.Change things the right way, not this stomping your foot and saying "naner naner boo boo. Im not gonna stay in quarantine anyplace you put me, and that big old state government can't make me"

Well, she probably does indeed know more about EVD than the vast majority of the population.

I actually admire her for her guts, she does have the courage of her convictions.

Is her rebellion psychologically prudent, considering that a large part of the population seem to be afraid of their own shadow at the moment? Probably not.

However I don’t blame her for standing up for her rights. She’s a smart, educated professional and she knows much more about infectious diseases, than the politicians responsible for this latest hare-brained scheme do.

I assign a large portion of the blame on the media for the state of terror that many members of the public seem to be in. The way they report on Ebola is inflammatory, adrenaline-fueled and injudicious. Their theatrical extravagant histrionics, whip people into a panicked frenzy.

LilBitty · Oct 31, 2014

Regardless...if her state makes it a law, and she blatantly chooses to disregard said law, she should be reprimanded. Revoking her license seems like a reasonable punishment. So that way she will be free to roam wherever she chooses. It also appears that she has done just that, so we'll wait to see what happens. It looks like one particular petition has picked up some steam because of her actions, and I wouldn't doubt there will be a lot more signing. People keep saying fear, but is it fear that's makes you buckle your seatbelt, or wear a helmet while riding a bike, or get a flu shot during flu season, or vaccinate your children, or put your kids in car seats. What do you tell your patient who is contact precaution that wants to leave their room? Or how about that r/o TB patient that we place in a negative pressure room because their X-Ray came back suspect. I bet you don't walk into their room with an N95, and surely know that none of you nurses are going to let that patient roam the halls as you wait for their PPD. But according to you all, this patient should be allowed to do whatever because we are violating their civil liberties by forcing them into isolation over "A Possibility." When in fact this patient sat in the ER for however many hours, and made contact with however many people without giving them TB. :nono: Save that for someone who doesn't know any better because it's not flying by me :no: . Please excuse any typos, I'm eating and nursing at the same time lol.

Glycerine82, LPN · Oct 31, 2014

I'm going to start a petition requesting that states revoke the licenses of stupid nurses.

GIVE IT TO ME! I want to sign it!!

macawake, MSN · Oct 31, 2014

Revoking her license seems like a reasonable punishment.

It doesn't seem the least bit reasonable to me. Actually, I think that it's the antithesis of reasonable.

People keep saying fear, but is it fear that's makes you buckle your seatbelt, or wear a helmet while riding a bike, or get a flu shot during flu season, or vaccinate your children, or put your kids in car seats.

Honestly, your (il)logical somersaults has my head spinning.

Buckling your seatbelt and wearing a helmet is being smart, and not a decision based on fear. Why? Because we actually know that these actions help reduce injuries/save lives if we were to have an accident. There’s research that supports this belief.

We also know that an asymptomatic person isn’t contagious. So how are the two situations you compare the same? In my opinion, they aren’t. It would be different if a person could actually infect another during the asymptomatic phase (which they can’t). Then you’d have a valid comparison.

Or how about that r/o TB patient that we place in a negative pressure room because their X-Ray came back suspect. .......... But according to you all, this patient should be allowed to do whatever because we are violating their civil liberties by forcing them into isolation over "A Possibility."

The x-ray came back suspect (this is something concrete indicating possible infection), that’s why the patient is isolated until infection can be ruled out. You don’t put every person who’s travelled to a country where tuberculosis is more common, but has no symptoms/signs whatsoever of infection, in a negative pressure room do you?

LilBitty · Oct 31, 2014

The x-ray came back suspect (this is something concrete indicating possible infection), that’s why the patient is isolated until infection can be ruled out. You don’t put every person who’s travelled to a country where tuberculosis is more common, but has no symptoms/signs whatsoever of infection, in a negative pressure room do you?

Suspicion is not the same as concrete. And this is exactly what we are trying to do with this nurse. Isolate until infection is ruled out. And you managed to bypass the part about letting them roam free while testing is in progress. Remember, she initially ran a 101 temp, however unreliable we think the thermometer was. Temporal thermometers are still widely used in my hospital, so there must be some validity to their readings. And you are proving my point about wearing seatbelts and helmets. It's not necessarily fear that drives us to do those things, but being smart enough to see the bigger picture of what could happen if we don't. It's seeing the bigger picture and preventing something from unnecessarily happening. She has 21 days to be ruled out. Why is THAT so hard to comprehend. This isn't about BIG government and politics to me. It is about being PROACTIVE and not SHORT-SIGHTED. Good grief, everything that people put in place for us is not to harm us. As a CHILD, I questioned things that seemed unfair to me at that time, and I definitely bucked the system when I felt I was being unjustly confined or restricted. When I became an ADULT with children of my own I understood the justification for my parents rules and restrictions. SHE is an adult, not a child. Bucking the system because you don't like rules is absurd.