At my hospital, our Foundation (fund raising department) has started what they call the "Circle of Caring". You become a member of the "Circle" by donating $10,000 or more to the Foundation. One of the perks of membership is "Healthcare Navigation Services" where a representative of the Foundation stays with you for the first 24 hours of your stay in the hospital starting in the ED. The names of the "Circle" members are flagged in our computer system and when they come in to the ED or are directly admitted we get a pop-up telling us to page the Foundation rep on call. They get taken directly to a private room and don't have to wait in the ED waiting area or in a multi-patient room regardless of their condition. The Foundation won't comment on it, but nurses have reported that they get seen much sooner by a Doc in the ED than they would have as a regular patient. I have had one of these patient's on the floor and the Foundation Rep basically lets you know, directly and indirectly, that this patient needs to be your top priority.
I realize the hospital depends on donations, but as a nurse it seems like we should be advocating for the seriously ill patient who is now having to wait even longer to be seen so that a big donor can have his "burning with urination" evaluated.
Is this becoming a new thing elsewhere in the country or is it just where I work?
Good Lord. That's just disturbing. So they get the VIP speed-healing treatment every time they come in with heartburn, and meanwhile the rest of us can sit back and suffer (or perhaps even die?) because we haven't donated $10K to the hospital? Charming.
Look, if they want the beautifully decorated private room or the yummy special meals - fine, whatever, let them waste their money. But having the medical staff focus on them first and foremost while "lesser" patients who haven't donated thousands of dollars but have conditions more deserving of immediate attention are left to wait? Imagine a scenario like that being evaluated in a nursing or medical ethics class....
I could swear I read a story in the New Yorker lately about boutique physician practices; I'll have to see if I can find it. In the meantime, here's a column I read about them in the New York Times a week or two ago. The Tufts version discussed in it sounds less egregious than what you're describing, OP but the idea still disturbs me. How many places would actually take the route Tufts is taking?
Elitism. This "Foundation" provides preferential treatment for those in support of their institution. Seems vastly unfair. I would imagine this is illegal as well..??? I would still provide impartial treatment, giving the priorities to my patients as necessary at that time.
We have a similar thing at my hospital. Actually...it sounds about the exact same. I really don't mind. It sounded much worse on paper than in actuality. In reality most of the "donors" are kind, caring people who are not demanding in the least. They don't expect special treatment. They understand if there is a "CRT" called overhead it is not a good time to call and ask for some more juice. If we have a "VIP" it does not effect the number of other patients we care for. Usually, in my experience, these patients are highly educated and very involved in their plan of care. They do everything that you ask without complaints and are very polite and respectful. So if they want to donate and have someone sit with them for 24 hours, make special meal requests and the like, its okay for me I :redbeathe our new vital sign machines that were bought with their money.
We have a similar thing at my hospital. Actually...it sounds about the exact same. I really don't mind. It sounded much worse on paper than in actuality. In reality most of the "donors" are kind, caring people who are not demanding in the least. They don't expect special treatment. They understand if there is a "CRT" called overhead it is not a good time to call and ask for some more juice. If we have a "VIP" it does not effect the number of other patients we care for. Usually, in my experience, these patients are highly educated and very involved in their plan of care. They do everything that you ask without complaints and are very polite and respectful. So if they want to donate and have someone sit with them for 24 hours, make special meal requests and the like, its okay for me I :redbeathe our new vital sign machines that were bought with their money.
So what do they get in exchange for less of your time (since you have other patients?) As opposed to more time with you, if you were to have less patients? Do they have a private room and catered meals? A special gown, robe, slippers? What makes it worth it to them? Are the doctors checking in on them more frequently? Or do you?
So if you are rich with a stubbed toe you live or poor with chest pain chances are good you will be dead. Great. Some lawyer will have a field day with the one day. It's only a matter of time.
Continue to prioritize care as you should. Don't let patients out of fear for getting in trouble. Your job is to advocate for those most in need.
That is totally unacceptable! Sounds like it's a huge lawsuit just waiting to happen. All of my patients are given the best care I can give. I don't care how much money they have. Rich or poor. Why would donating money make them better? This world is getting more and more idiotic and unreasonable. People don't care about their fellow man, only how much money they make.:down:
It's my license, I'm going to prioritize my care based on patient need, not on how much one donates. Believe me if something happens to another patient while you were catering to Mr. VIP those administrators who asked staff to make the VIP your first priority will denie it all, no one will remember making the request.
If administration wants to thank people for their donations, send them a hand written Thank you, a gift certificate to a nice restaurant, flowers or a fruit basket, but stop telling nurses how to manage their time and run their practices.
So what do they get in exchange for less of your time (since you have other patients?) As opposed to more time with you, if you were to have less patients? Do they have a private room and catered meals? A special gown, robe, slippers? What makes it worth it to them? Are the doctors checking in on them more frequently? Or do you?
All our patients get private rooms. They may get special robes, but so do some of our other patients. I believe the person who stays the first 24 hours can arrange to have food brought in to them if that is within their doctors orders. I check in on all my patients every 2 hours, at least, on night shift and have been told nothing about making them more of a priority unless their diagnoses/symptoms require it. Doctors do not check in on them more often, although will often times round on them first.
That is totally unacceptable! Sounds like it's a huge lawsuit just waiting to happen. All of my patients are given the best care I can give. I don't care how much money they have. Rich or poor. Why would donating money make them better? This world is getting more and more idiotic and unreasonable. People don't care about their fellow man, only how much money they make.
:down:
.thumb.gif.5406a59d44f5c666e8ff3ebac639497a.gif){kind=avatar}
TDCHIM
686 Posts
Good Lord. That's just disturbing. So they get the VIP speed-healing treatment every time they come in with heartburn, and meanwhile the rest of us can sit back and suffer (or perhaps even die?) because we haven't donated $10K to the hospital? Charming.
Look, if they want the beautifully decorated private room or the yummy special meals - fine, whatever, let them waste their money. But having the medical staff focus on them first and foremost while "lesser" patients who haven't donated thousands of dollars but have conditions more deserving of immediate attention are left to wait? Imagine a scenario like that being evaluated in a nursing or medical ethics class....
I could swear I read a story in the New Yorker lately about boutique physician practices; I'll have to see if I can find it. In the meantime, here's a column I read about them in the New York Times a week or two ago. The Tufts version discussed in it sounds less egregious than what you're describing, OP but the idea still disturbs me. How many places would actually take the route Tufts is taking?