Jkloo

The school performs a cost of attendance analysis factoring in living costs for 1 person, not for multiple. The government bases the unsubsidized loan levels permitted from this. You can go out and get extra loans from banks and other private lenders if needed. I am surprised it's only 1,300 a month after tuition. Usually that just covers room and board, then they estimate personal, transport, loan fees, and supplies and tack that on as cost of attendance to increase the loan maximum. Usually you can petition for more.

Sorry I really don't know. It's just the reputation. I know of a hospital in Texas that for instance won't take students from Florida schools....presumably wouldn't hire either. Not trying to start an argument or debate just saying it's something I wouldve liked to know when applying. I'm guessing it's because there are also of schools, pay is relatively low, and there's AA and mda conflicts....Probably ends up with poor clinical sites.

There are a few good ones but for some reason Florida schools have a poor reputation.

You're welcome. I was in nursing school many years ago when I discovered that there was such a thing as CRNAs. Keep your eye on the prize and try to enjoy the journey!

Yeah, join any hospital committees you can get your hands on. Join your local AACN when you get into an ICU and go to the meetings. Oftentimes the hospital will have everyone do refresher training on equipment twice a year or so, so try to get in there and volunteer to teach the training on equipment. Sometimes local RN schools need people to help in sim labs too which could also be handy. Becoming a charge nurse just takes time and being a capable individual that can make decisions under stress, some hospitals they are more like office bees so obviously don't gun for that it that's how it is where you end up working. Also forgot to mention you're going to need to eventually shadow someone and keep a log of what cases you saw, interesting things you did, and most importantly the CRNAs name and contact info for later.

Just work on taking more science classes and doing well in nursing school. It's a very long journey. Do well in your nursing courses, try to be flexible and move to an area where you can get into ICU nursing right away, and start taking science classes on the side. Do well in those classes. You'll eventually need to get your CCRN certification after a couple years in the ICU, and also work on doing the GRE. During that process look into schools, open houses, specific requirements that they may have. Join committees and organizations, do foreign aid trips, try to teach something, become a charge nurse, do all of the above and prepare for the interviewing process. Be prepared for everything you planned to go to s*** and things to take even longer than initially anticipated.

They're not going to go digging, they're gonna be looking at your resume and the info you or your references provide.

Plenty of applicants without waiving any requirements as it is.

Nobody wants to be delayed in graduating. Some parts of the country are being hit harder than others, to make a such a blanket call as to shut down all clinical for all programs is ridiculous. Students are experienced ICU nurses at the very least. They can be of value to the team. Honestly if some students want to go and deal with the risks, go for it. If others want to stay home and potentially be delayed in graduating, that's fine too.

Yes. I am not sure how the topic got on OSHA/Fire Marshal and other federal mandates. If you have a hospital wide policy allowing drinks at the nurses station, I would bet money you would be found in violation by TJC during a survey. Someone above even gave an email from OSHA, which from my interpretation meant that this would be perfectly acceptable in their view unless particularly restricted in the hospital's own policies. I think what people are complaining about is these accrediting bodies are going around to the public saying how they are keeping the PUBLIC safe. But when it comes to big issues that would likely have a much bigger impact on the public's safety, they are completely ignored in favor of finding relatively minor infractions even if they are violations of OSHA/Fire marshal codes. I think its overall a much easier process for the accrediting body and hospital administrators. Finding minor issues that can be tacked on to the duties of the general staff is much easier than coming in and saying you need to start hiring more staff around here in order to meet our certification guidelines.

Any bottle of paralytic I've handled was bright red with the words paralytic stamped all over it.

I don't know. I suppose if the disaster was completely unpredictable, then yeah it would be fairly separate. In the southeast with hurricanes...there is at least a fair amount of predictability to them. Increase the pay or find other incentives and there will be plenty of single people willing to stick it out, or others from around the country willing to come in for relief. As I said earlier the increase in financial rewards are common with federal law enforcement, contractors, insurance agencies, you name it... Not only that, but the financial pressures would encourage hospitals and other settings to actively transfer their patients to refuge rather than just rely on internal staff working under threat...

If it was decent enough there wouldn't be a need to threaten people's licenses or fire people over it...they'd be able to sustain the minimal staff requirement as needed through market forces. Capitalism, right? They'd have plenty of travelers willing to ride the disaster out for the right compensation. They don't currently, because threats are easier and just as effective as actually paying people what they are worth.

What I don't get is all these teams of disaster relief folks that come in from all over the country...law enforcement, linemen, other state agents...all receiving massive financial incentives to go and do this. Then you have the hospital staff who have to be threatened with legal or professional sanction in order to keep them going back to work...rather than offering financial compensation worthy of their time. This question wouldn't even be asked if we had a similar system in place.

Sounds like you're doing great. And I do not mean that sarcastically. Don't beat yourself up over this.

I think you need to genuinely ask yourself what you'd rather be doing with your life - career wise. A lot of folks are running off getting various degrees with absolutely no market for them. Today, you really cannot afford to be goofing around getting degrees with no clear financial rewards at the end. The lack of a serious livable wage during those formative years coupled with the debt school generally requires now is simply too much to go through without a clear plan in mind. Do you have something in mind that you'd prefer to be doing?

Does it matter? Community college is dog cheap bordering on about 1-2k a year in tuition even for those who pay full price. Isn't New York also free for most?

I'm really surprised at the amount of comments putting the blame on the physician. I can't really see how the physician is to blame for someone who isn't involved in the patient's care failing to communicate, administering an overdose, failing to document it, and failing to notify the appropriate people. Sure, he or she should've updated the MAR. Sounds like an NCLEX "perfect-hospital scenario" question. In real life providers are busy and I figure he or she expected that for the time-being a verbal communication with the primary nurse would suffice. We want to be colleague on the health care team. We want all members to be seen as equals. Blaming the provider is kind of a cop-out in a case like this in my opinion...

It's often why a lot of folks earn money in these types of areas, retire early, then move to the LCOL areas. You can make and save ton if you live with a few roommates in SF making 150-200k (not working overtime) in SF. Then proceed to another area and basically live off of your investments or work less.

What excellent leadership material

Send me a PM if you can

One aspect of the affordable housing crisis in California, which contributes tremendously to the increased COL, is that a lot of the home owners and builders don't really want more affordable housing. Having to buy a $2 million near beachfront house isn't too bad when you have great job security and can be almost certain it will appreciate. Or better yet, rent it out on AirBNB essentially year-round and rake in more than your mortgage (which has become a huge issue for the San Diego area at least). A lot of areas have no more horizontal space and can only go vertical. Many of the beachy areas like San Francisco have put huge restrictions on going vertical to build. Even buying a large "McMansion" in the Midwest for <$1 million would really suck if it ended up depreciating or staying the same over time. Not too many folks are interested in renting one of these.

I think part of the problem is we now have a system-blaming tendency that is transitioning back to people-blaming. That kind of mentality is on the way out. The nurse at Vanderbilt is being charged with homicide and will need to have a defense team to try and find another aspect to blame (the "system"). Every action you do you need to honestly consider, if I was in court and the prosecution called an expert witness in my field to the stand, would they agree that my actions are "within the standard of care and practice." Will the jury buy that my actions are acceptable and within the standard of care? Physicians have been doing this for years now. Our field is now experiencing this, and many people are being caught off-guard that they can't just "blame the system" and be done with it.

I brought up San Antonio and other cities as a metric of crime. The poster above was implying Sacramento was crime-ridden. That isn't the case when compared to other cities. Lets say the cost of living is higher. You spend lets say, 20% more living in Modesto than you would in San Antonio. How much do you spend on average a year? 40k? So now you're spending 48k. You've gone up a whopping 8k. Meanwhile, this guy is taking home 240k. How much can you take home in San Antonio? Guess what, his cost of living is higher, sure. But he is still financially WAY better off in this situation. Obviously the guy is an outlier, but it's a real pain to see people throwing the whole thing out the window as a "wash" because of the "higher cost of living." It's preposterous, demonstrates a clear lack of financial understanding, and is driven by false ideas that the entirety of "California is too 'spensive to bother living in" by financial illiterates.

I also want to mention, crime statistics per capita for Sacramento is literally the EXACT same compared to places like Omaha. Per capita places like Minneapolis and San Antonio have more crime including violent events.