Published Oct 13, 2014
Blue Roses
116 Posts
Am I the only one who feels very uncomfortable reading this article about the Texan nurse who caught Ebola on the job? Or is this ethically ok because of the availability of information these days?
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ebola-virus-outbreak/who-nina-pham-meet-nurse-who-contracted-ebola-n224726
macawake, MSN
2,141 Posts
No, you’re not the only one.
If a “close family friend” hadn’t felt an irresistible urge (is there $$$ to be made?) to confirm her identity to the media, this nurse and her family and friends would have had
the chance to fight this battle in private, without the media and Joe public bugging them. Even with the confirmation media isn't forced to publish a person's name, it's a choice they made. Shameful in my opinion.
I’m assuming that the nurse and her family wish to remain anonymous, if they want the media attention than that’s a different story. That’s of course her/their choice to make. I doubt that she/they’d need an anonymous “close family friend” to confirm her identity though, if they felt that the media attention was desirable.
Identifying her name and area of residence will likely not bring anything positive for them. The Spanish nurse’s aide infected with Ebola had droves of curious looky-loos around her apartment as she was being cared for in hospital.
klone, MSN, RN
14,856 Posts
That article made me sick. What it wrote about how "she got her nursing license in 2010 but didn't get her CCRN until two months before caring for the Ebola patient" as if to put her competence into question. And then the comments about her Facebook/Pinterest accounts. I am livid on behalf of this woman. What a horrible, piece-of-**** article.
UnaNayeli
91 Posts
AND the article tells you the brick color and general geographical location of her home!
Don't get sick, folks! What a mess for this young nurse to have to deal with early in her career! I hope some of the older nurses in her life will step up and help her figure this out. Few others will "get it."
Oh, wait! The CDC spokesperson DID say he didn't mean it as judgment on the nurse. He needs a new "talking points" person to prep his news releases; the person writing the current ones is doing a crap job!
Caffeine_IV
1,198 Posts
Did they have to identity her so that those who may have had contact would know about a possible risk?
wanderlust99
793 Posts
I read that article. It was basically an account of someone online stalking her Facebook and pinterest, google mapping her parents address and then googling what CCRN is. Ridiculous.
Ruby Vee, BSN
17 Articles; 14,036 Posts
Don't blame the journalist -- blame the "close personal friend" who gave him all that personal information. And the "news organization" that published it.
But yes, I think there's a lot too much information revealed about this nurse, and too much blame affixed directly on her.
edmia, BSN, RN
827 Posts
Exactly. Real nice reporting there.
Ugh!
I hope they offer her a lot of money for exclusive interviews after she's discharged. (I've got high hopes and prayers for her!)
GerberaDaisy
46 Posts
i absolutely agree with what Ruby Vee has said. I find it sickening that this nurse's privacy and competence have been hung out to dry like this. Makes me very angry.
firstinfamily, RN
790 Posts
I hate the implication that she had her CCRN only two months before caring for the ebola patient, does that really matter??? A nurse does not have to have the CCRN to care for a highly infectious disease, but to accuse her in this manner is ridiculous and just shows how little the media understands about nursing. So much for the anonoymous family friend. Total invasion of privacy.
I'm glad I'm not the only one! Reading the article made me feel like I know more about this poor woman than I do about presidential candidates during election season. Too much information!
elkpark
14,633 Posts
I guess I'm an outlier on this, but, given the massive, widespread dissemination of personal details, gossip, (and conspiracy theories) about Mr. Duncan, why does she deserve any more privacy than he got? I don't recall anyone suggesting that every private detail of his life and condition should not be public. This is the world we live in now. "Privacy" is apparently an irrelevant, outdated concept.