Outraged by no more privacy

Kooky Korky, BSN, RN · Dec 9, 2010

Privacy in the US? Never.

You are kidding, right?

TDCHIM · Dec 9, 2010

By nature I'm a major privacy advocate, but I see no issue with fingerprinting nurses. People are extremely vulnerable when being cared for in a hospital, so to me it makes sense to fingerprint and thoroughly screen those who would have contact with patients. I do agree that techs and housekeeping personnel should be fingerprinted as well as clinical personnel like physicians, nurses, therapists, etc. Fingerprinting is standard in many fields such as teaching and law enforcement for similar reasons.

Kooky Korky, BSN, RN · Dec 9, 2010

well this way someone can't steal your social security/ idenity and practice as a nurse under your license.

How do you figure that?

Kooky Korky, BSN, RN · Dec 9, 2010

I'm going to disagree too and say I am fine with it. I have nothing to hide so I don't care if they want to run background checks on me etc. I am even fine with the whole airplane security thing. I feel like privacy and safety can often conflict. I feel like this only raises the professionalism of being a nurse. I am all for transparency. Just my opinion and an interesting topic to talk about.

How about the professionalism and transparency of doctors? administrators? nursing home owners? restaurant owners and workers and other food handlers? After all, they could taint our food.

Where does it end?

Here's the answer - it doesn't. it only increases. Power, once obtained, will never willingly be let go. Same with privacy. Knowledge (about employees, for instance) is power.

And for those who say they don't care because they have nothing to hide, therefore naught to fear - it sounds reasonable, but do you really trust all the people who know every intimate detail of your life and those who have control of your fingerprints, in this case, to be totally scrupulous and honest and never misuse their power?

lindarn · Dec 9, 2010

In what seems like a hundred years ago, when I took my licensing exam (the old paper and pencil one that lasted three days), ALL NURSES ARRIVING TO TAKE THE TEST, HAD TO HAVE IDENTIFICATION, we were ALL FINGERPRINTED WHEN WE ARRIVED, BEFORE, DURING AND AFTER, EACH TEST, AND WHEN WE HAD FINISHED, AND BEFORE WE LEFT THE PLACE WHERE WE TOOK THE EXAM.

We were not allowed to leave the testing area during the each test, not even to go to the bathroom. We left our books and purses in the front of the classroom, all we could take to the desks, were pencils, and a pack of kleenex.

No one complained, there was no such thing as identity theft then. When we all started our jobs at the hospital (this was a diploma program and we were all hired after graduation), we all walked down to the police station (during orientation), that was located down the block from the hospital, and we were ALL fingerprinted.

I see no problem with this at all. We were taking a licensing exam for a professional license to practice nursing. With that license come responsibility and accountability.

There are people who steal wallets and ID, and obtain professional licenses from this, that is why Washington State no longer issues paper licenses.

A while back, I worked with a nurse who had her wallet stolen, and several years later, met someone who told her that she had met a nurse with the same name as her, at County USC hospital in California. This woman had a VERY unusual name, and in her opinion, and mine as well, this is the person who had stolen her wallet, and her other ID, and was posing as an RN, and got hired as one. That is why it is a good idea to fingerprint employees who have sensitive jobs with the public.

JMHO and my NY $0.02.

Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN

Somewhere in the PACNW

Dvldlphn32 · Dec 9, 2010

In the scenario you describe, she'd be a patient, not a working nurse.

That was my point exactly, put yourself in the other person's shoes.

Dvldlphn32 · Dec 9, 2010

Great, so every nurse that cared for the patient is a suspect, but techs and housekeeping that were in the room touching things aren't suspects?

Do I think it is responsible for everyone in the hospital to be fingerprinted? Sure if that is what it takes to make the place safe. I did not mention techs and housekeeping because this discussion was about the nurses. Fingerprint them too, heck fingerprint the volunteers.

I find it amazing that people cry when things like 9/11 happen and say "The government did not protect us" but then when the government steps in to try to protect us they say "You are violating my freedoms". If there is one thing I learned from the military it is this, Freedom is not free and you have to sacrafice some element of privacy to ensure safety. Sure people misuse power but if the threat of people breaking laws (Misusing power) is enough for us to not enforce laws for public safety then we might as well just go ahead and not have any laws at all.

Dvldlphn32 · Dec 9, 2010

I had to get it done just to volunteer at the hospital. The strange part is I did it at a UPS store and not a police station or post office.
The one thing I do object to is an employer running a credit check on an individual. Unless you are in a position where you will be handling large amounts of cash or other people's finances it shouldn't be done. Having bad credit doesn't effect anybody's ability to perform a job. Especially in today's horrible economy when people have to rely on credit after their savings are depleted just to put food on the table and buy clothes for their kids.

I also had to be fingerprinted for the VA Medical Center to volunteer.

In order to get security clearances they run credit checks no matter what your job is in the military, for secret or higher anyway. I am not sure about confidential which is the lowest. A guy in my command lost his rate (military job) and was "down graded" to another job after he filed for bankruptcy and bounced a few checks. He already had his security clearance but they took it away after all that happened. A friend of mine in NCIS, the real one not the TV show lol, told me that once you have shown you can not be trusted with your own money there is no reason for the government to think you would say no to selling their secrets.

Just a perspective, I do not really have much of an opinion on credit checks.

pinksugar · Dec 10, 2010

I actually don't mind getting fingerprinted too much (my fingerprints have been on file for years for an internship I did in college). My problem is that the patients don't have to be fingerprinted also. They should get fingerprinted when they come through the hospital door, as far as I'm concerned. They beat on and threaten us, try to kill their (or their mother's :rolleyes: ) doctor, etc. Patients are bigger criminals than the professionals taking care of them in most cases. :lol2:

Dvldlphn32 · Dec 10, 2010

I actually don't mind getting fingerprinted too much (my fingerprints have been on file for years for an internship I did in college). My problem is that the patients don't have to be fingerprinted also. They should get fingerprinted when they come through the hospital door, as far as I'm concerned. They beat on and threaten us, try to kill their (or their mother's ) doctor, etc. Patients are bigger criminals than the professionals taking care of them in most cases.

Good point!

Anisettes, BSN, RN · Dec 10, 2010

I may have missed if this was mentioned in the previous 4 pages of comments - but this is nothing new - I was fingerprinted in NYC when I took the old style NCLEX - 4 separate #2 pencil exams nearly 24 years ago.

We were fingerprinted during EACH of the 4 exams over the 2 days. We're talking almost a quarter of a century ago. I was also fingerprinted when I took the NYPD exam a few years earlier than that. Maybe New York was just ahead of the times back then with the fingerprinting, so I don't have the same feeling of upset the OP has - it's nothing new to me. I've had to be fingerprinted for reciprocal licensure in other states as well. I just assumed it was required everywhere.

gymnut · Dec 10, 2010

And for those who say they don't care because they have nothing to hide, therefore naught to fear - it sounds reasonable, but do you really trust all the people who know every intimate detail of your life and those who have control of your fingerprints, in this case, to be totally scrupulous and honest and never misuse their power?

I get what you're saying but, if you really think about it anyone can get your information and abuse it if they tried hard enough. A person is plugged into the system in more ways than just fingerprints.

Own a cell phone? That customer service rep has access to your SSN#, bank account and credit card numbers, along with your address and all the phone numbers of anyone you have on that phone. Plus with the smart phones out now they have access to everything you do on that phone. I know because I was a customer service rep for one of them. It would take absolutely nothing to jot down this info walk out and sell all that info to some shady character and start destroying lives.

It's not just with cell phones either. If you have credit cards what's to stop a disgruntled rep working at the company to sell that info to someone? Or really anyone in charge of handling any documents from your electric bill to your drivers license to use info in an illegal manner?

So while I don't trust everyone I have to have faith because if I didn't what kind of life is it to live thinking the boogeyman is out to get me? I'd be sitting at home all day with a tinfoil hat on my head worrying about the 'guvment stealin' my thoughts'. :lol2: