Jump to content

Is Shortage in Nursing really a hoax?

Male Students   (5,854 Views 43 Comments)
by mikefilmstudent mikefilmstudent (New Member) New Member

651 Visitors; 7 Posts

advertisement

You are reading page 4 of Is Shortage in Nursing really a hoax?. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

434 Visitors; 75 Posts

4 minutes ago, NICU Guy said:

I am not disagreeing that there will be a need in 10-15 yrs due to Baby Boomers getting older and nurses retiring. I also think that they are basing the amount of nurses retiring on the old retirement model based on a pension. People in the 1950's and 1960's used to hit their 65th birthday, get their gold watch from the company, and retire with their pension. Current retirement system is based on the 401K in which the employee is responsible for their retirement (plus company match). Some employees have the forethought to put 10-15% of their pay in their 401K and retire a millionaire at 65. Others would rather have more money in their paycheck and contribute very little to their 401K. Those are the people that will be unable to retire when they want to. I work in a very large unit (300+ nurses) and see many of the 60+ nurses that their bodies are worn out and they need/want to retire, but can't due to medical bills and not enough in their retirement fund to be able to retire.

My point is that we have been hearing the "nursing shortage" is imminent for the last 5 yrs. because the Baby Boomers are retiring.  Baby Boomers were born between 1944 and 1964. That makes them 55-75 yrs old. If 65 is the norm to retire, then we should be in the middle the retirement boom, but nursing shortage has yet to happen. 

 

Your logic has a few flaws. Firstly, you base an entire populous solely on one retirement option, currently being the 401(k), and mention the past as a pension. There is a myriad of retirement investment options these days that have nothing to do with retirement age. A 401(k) is merely another option in the sea of retirement investments. You cite the age of 65 as retirement age, which Social Security benefits open up at the age of 62 and can go as high as 67. So, 65 is still a relevant number. Even with a 65 "retirement age", the average age of retirees is 59.88 years old, negating your assumption that people must work longer in order to retire.

Secondly, you assume that just because we are in the midst of the retirement of baby boomers that we should no longer see a nursing shortage. Just because people retire, does not mean they are sick or need medical attention.  As the baby boomers continue to age, we will see a greater strain on the system in geriatric units. Healthcare is great these days and life expectancies continue to grow, thus meaning a healthier population.

Source

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1,846 Visitors; 300 Posts

On 11/28/2017 at 2:50 PM, elkpark said:

That's typically because employers choose to keep staffing low for financial reasons, not because they couldn't hire more nurses tomorrow if they wanted to.

 

A) Different government agencies have different numbers and opinions on this. The DHHS section specifically related to US healthcare services and providers is predicting a large national surplus of RNs by 2025. Guess we'll just have to wait and see which prediction turns out to be more accurate.

B) Nurses in their 50s are going to be retiring soon? I and plenty of other nurses I know are in our 60s and have no plans to retire any time soon.

I would retire today if I could, and Social Security for my birthdate has been pushed back to  age 67 instead of 65, so I'm pissed.  The shortage I see is the government not paying facilities enough to hire more nurses, I sure am tired of working myself to death because there aren't enough of us to do the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
advertisement

434 Visitors; 75 Posts

12 minutes ago, Forest2 said:

I would retire today if I could, and Social Security for my birthdate has been pushed back to  age 67 instead of 65, so I'm pissed.  The shortage I see is the government not paying facilities enough to hire more nurses, I sure am tired of working myself to death because there aren't enough of us to do the job.

Depending on your age, Social Security might not even be around anymore lol. I'm 31. I'm planning to invest because I don't think my food stamps...I mean Social Security check will be around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

llg has 40 years experience as a PhD, RN and works as a Nursing Professional Development + Academic Facult.

5 Followers; 57,832 Visitors; 13,016 Posts

I watch turnover at my hospital as part of my job ... and I think I am beginning to see more retirements than I used to where I work.   The change in data trends is not dramatic, but there were a few more retirement last year than in previous years and the retirement-related question on our employee survey has gone up slightly in the past 2 years.   

Whether or not this is the beginning of the predicted "big Baby Boomer wave of retirement" ... I don't know.   But when I look around, I see a lot of people about my age (mid-60's) who are starting to talk about retirement "in the next few years."   For me, once I started seeing older siblings and friends retire and be happy as retirees, it started to become "more real" and I moved my expected retirement date up a bit so that I could join them.

Sorry ... I am not male ... but I figured gender wasn't really key in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PeeWeeQ has 10 years experience as a CNA, EMT-B.

834 Visitors; 41 Posts

On 5/2/2019 at 10:07 AM, Forest2 said:

"The shortage I see is the government not paying facilities enough to hire more nurses..."

You should really look and see how well having the government "pay facilities...to hire more nurses" is working out in the UK. Hint: its not. 

It always strikes me as funny (and sad) when people think "the government" just has the money to do, whatever....Yes, all of society's ailes could surely be cured if each one just got a few more bucks from their rich uncle. 

The problem with that is that money isn't the only problem and that's not "the government's" money to spend as it sees fit---it belongs to the people. 

I'm not getting into this profession to live well or to make my nest egg--if you have grown up over the last 3 decades and, at any time, you've had it in your head that SS is going to be there for you when you retire OR that healthcare work (other than being an MD) is the best way to have a good retirement, you haven't been paying attention. 

I was a locomotive engineer and if I was more concerned about wanting to make a six-figure salary and have an OUTSTANDING retirement (look up railroad retirement), I'd have held out and stayed there. I liked my job, had union protection (but, I'm glad to be rid of the union), and would have eventually been untouchable due to seniority---or so I thought and many still think. Look at the technological changes coming to the railroad--it doesn't bode well for maintaining the current size of the workforce, and, they've been downsized before by technology. 

I'm going to be a nurse because I enjoy working with patients. Yes, I do understand that I could get tired or burnt out or something else can happen which is why I will continue my education to open up other avenues of opportunity and why I will also maintain other certifications like EMT and a class-A CDL. I'm already pushing my mid-40s and I've already had one career that was ended by technology and, another one that eventually would be. I'm not bitter about it, its simply a reality of the modern world. Another reality is that the government does not and never will have the money nor resources to prop up one profession, no matter how noble a cause it may be. And, if you think that government involvement would make any certain job more secure, well, think again--political winds change all of the time....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Casey_93 works as a Student.

35 Visitors; 2 Posts

It was always my understanding that "competitive" nursing programs were just seeking to ensure as high a passing/graduation rate as possible. A lot of programs lose many students along the way as it is, I'm sure those numbers would be much higher if there weren't stricter standards in place.

And also, even if it was a "hoax" the fact still stands that nursing is a hugely in demand profession throughout the entire country. A growing and aging population means that there's a greater need for more nurses of any caliber practicing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1,849 Visitors; 246 Posts

On 11/28/2017 at 1:50 PM, elkpark said:

 

Never mind 2017 lol

Edited by Rionoir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing 0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×