steve0123

Did he get too much morphine? Intravenously - perhaps 8mg is a bit much to push in one go. IM/SC - not at all.

I believe that I have no right to expect others to abstain/refrain from smoking. Just as no one else has any right to expect me to behave in a certain way. So what if it's harmful/addictive/etc! We all know it! But some people do it anyway. It's their choice, so pardon the punn, but BUTT OUT! I'm a non smoker, but I have my own share of vices that I'm quite happy to continue with too. So smokers, I'm on your side! Enjoy those ciggies while you still can.

Hi- I've been trying to get this information from the Californian Board (for LVN's), but have not had any luck getting an answer... Any help you can offer would be very much appreciated! I am an Australian Registered Nurse (Bachelor's degree, five years post registration experience up to and including ICU). My undergraduate degree was a little bit short on pediatric theory, and in order for me to become an **RN** in California, I would be required to undertake remedial education in this area. Am I able to use my qualification and experience to become an **LVN** without having to go back to school? Also, what are the employment prospects for LVN's? Does the same shortage exist, or would I be taking a job that really should be filled by an American citizen?

It depends how keen you are to start nursing in the US after graduation from an Australian university. It's a long process (as other posters have stated, as your program of study will be scrutinised by the US Board of Nursing to ensure it is comparable, etc), but it is possible if you have the time. I just have two things to add to this forum: 1) Make sure the course covers ALL the US requirements - many universities in Australia are deficient in Paediatrics and Obstetrics theory/clinical hours (but then again there are many that are not). 2) The graduate entry courses you suggested (such as Sydney University's masters program etc) might not be acceptable. Some boards require the program of study to be strictly an undergraduate course. I know it's senseless bureaucracy, but it's just the way it is...

I've been in the game for seven years. What used to get me out of bed was knowing that I was doing something good that couldn't be bastardised for the profit of some fat cat somewhere. Now I've gone about 180 degrees, and I've come to realise that I was just deluded by youthful naivety. It took about seven years for me to really see and understand the true nature of the beast and all the interacting elements that continue to see the profession (as a whole) underpaid, overworked, and severely undervalued by both patient's and allied colleagues. So I amputated most of those altruistic attachments I once held to the job, and found myself a series of brilliantly paying contracts. I'm now roughly 75% in it for the money, and 25% in it because it's "what I do", at least as a stepping stone to my next career. Sorry Sissyboo, but this notion of nurses as angels from heaven with an unshakeable belief in back breaking labour being it's own reward is something that you'll soon learn doesn't really work in this day and age. What gets me out of bed these days (and I'm not the least bit ashamed to state this) is knowing just how fat my paycheck will be at the end of the week. And you know, I think I'm happier at work and provide much better patient care as a result!!!

Good call. I think that's a very sensible and much more helpful alternative to the ridiculously PC "non adherence", which achieves nothing more than the term "non compliance" anyway.

What's special about male nurses? I don't know, but one thing that makes me so ANGRY is being called a "male nurse", as though it's an entirely different job description. I do everything the girls do, and I happen to think I do it pretty damned well! My brothers know this term is my achilles heel, and take great delight introducing me to people as their brother, "the male nurse"...

There's nothing I like better than a debate over medical semantics... To those people who find the terms "non-compliant" and "denies" distasteful when used in the context of patient behaviour or responses to questioning, I say pull that stick out of that place it's sitting... The patient approaches the health care practitioner for help. The health care practitioner responds by prescribing a treatment regime. The patient either complies or does not comply with that regime, meaning they are either compliant or non compliant. "Non adherence", in this context, is a synonymous term, and the benefit of "increased patient autonomy" it offers is mere rhetoric: the patient is no more autonomous by not adhering to the prescribed regime as they are by not complying with it. Similarly, when a patient is asked a simple question, such as "are you a smoker?", and responds in the negative, they are confirming they are not a smoker by denying the alternative positive response. Thus, the patient denies being a smoker. When used in the context of a medical examination, it is possibly more accurate to state that the patient denies a direct question rather than interpreting their responses as gospel truth, as the health care practitioner may not be able to state with any great deal of certainty that the patient is in fact telling the truth. For example: "Mary, a 70y lady with chronic emphysema denies being a smoker..." seems a much more accurate record of interview than "Mary, a 70y lady with chronic emphysema has never smoked in her life...". The latter sentence of course suggesting the interviewer has intimate knowledge of every event occuring in Mary's life from birth to interview. Oh I love semantics...

I'm 24, and have been nursing since I was 17 (straight after I left high school). I worked as a nursing assistant through my uni degree, and have been a registered ("professional") nurse for a bit over three years. In my seven year nursing career, I've worked my up the ladder in a variety of clinical areas, and am now at a stage where I can call myself a specialist critical care nurse and earn a lot of money doing that. The thing is, I decided to leave nursing too (I'm doing a law degree, because we all know that society needs more lawyers than nurses). I'm not leaving because of the money or conditions (I have the potential in my current position to nett about $1500 to $2000 a week, and taking my contracted entitlements such as breaks etc has never been an issue, I just take them). I'm leaving because I feel the way many of my colleagues do: that for a so-called profession, we don't seem to work as (or be treated as) true professionals. My motivations for entering nursing were fairly honourable: I wanted to help people in a meaningful way, and commerce/business was never an option. But I also had certain career expectations - namely, to be respected by my patient's and allied professions for the work that I do, and to be able to practice my profession with genuine autonomy. Society views the medical profession as the experts in healthcare - they diagnose and treat illness, while we help the person through the experience of that illness - and because of that, we are always destined to work under the direction of the medical profession. I can't think of the times I've disagreed with a discharge decision because from my perspective the patient isn't ready, or a treatment regime that serves to prolong life where there is no quality of life, but had no real say because the entire system places the balance of power and authority over such decisions in the hands of the medical profession. In short, my reason for leaving is because I want to work in an occupation where my professional opinion is truly valued, and I can provide my services without being undermined by another profession.

Yes - I'm interested in what people might have to say about 5thflrnurse's question. Which groups of the nursing population are enjoying stability, and who is looking at trouble ahead? Does the problem seem to be more prevalent in London, the country, or everywhere in between? Are agency nurses still being utilised (as much)?

I worked in the UK briefly earlier this year. When I left, there were plenty of nursing jobs all over the place, but recently I've been hearing stories of mass redundancies in the midst of the worst nursing shortage ever, budget blowouts, restructuring, etc etc etc... It sounds like the guts have fallen out of the NHS and it's gasping its dying breaths... And taking its nurses to hell with it! Is nursing unemployment seriously an issue at the moment? That is, are nurses genuinely facing difficulty securing employment? Are we now, for the first time in a long time, fighting it out with all "the others" in the interview room for a lousy staff nurse position? Where will this all lead, both in the short term and long term? I'm returning for another three month stint in one week, and I'm actually a bit worried about what I might find... Can I have some reassurance? Or do you only have horror stories to tell?

No I would definitely not. I was working in an ICU not so long ago where we treated a critically ill thirty something person with necrotising fasciitis after a friend administered IM B-12. I know that the risk of acquiring necrotising fasciitis or similar doesn't change with the drug administered, but you jogged my memory with this post because I remember thinking at the time how such a horrible thing could have happened from such an innocent little jab. This person lost their arm and a good chunk of tissue elsewhere and very nearly didn't make it. It was only their age and lack of co-morbidities that saved them - I doubt Grandma would have pulled through. The thing is that the person who administered the shot did everything right (cleaning the site, etc), but despite it all they still introduced the pathogen. You couldn't guarantee a similar thing wouldn't happen to you. I think its not worth the risk. Theres always a tactful way of getting out of something...

Hi all. I'm an Aussie nurse, currently living in London (not nursing here of course, it's far too difficult to get registered and I'm sick of playing the game), and I can't wait to get out of this place and head to Ireland. I've had a poke around An Bord Altranais' website, and registering seems to be a fairly standard procedure in line with most other reasonable registration bodies around the world, but my problem is finding an employer to sponsor my work authorisation. I don't need a visa to enter Ireland, but I do need an employer before I can get my authorisation to work (it doesn't cost them anything more than a piece of paper with some ink confirming my employment). Does anyone know of any good agencies or hospitals in central Dublin (or anywhere really)? Because I've searched the net and they're thin on the ground...

When I asked this question (seems like over a year ago at least) my intention was to find out more about the role of the RT. Thanks to the many RT's who responded - I wasn't aware that so much preparation was required (I was skeptical having read so much about certain jobs being created and staffed with unqualified workers to cut corners/costs). It was not my intention to suggest that the role of the RT is any less worthwhile than that of the RN - I agree that the more specialised each member of the care team is, the better the treatment/outcome is for the patient. However, as an RN (and even in my undergrad days), I have watched the nursing profession gradually cut itself loose of certain areas of expertise and naturally, I am concerned about what this means for the future of professional nursing. I am of the view that critical care nursing is a specialty area of nursing, and to deny nurses the opportunity to manage the airway/vents of a critically ill patient significantly diminishes their claim to expertise in this field.

Oh yes. Double the registration fees! Lord knows they earn every cent! The overseas registrations department alone brings in at least £8046000 for the NMC each year (their own statistics - £149 x ~54000 applicants - thats not including fees and charges for actually registering and all the other rot you have to pay for). And I'll tell you something else - they need God's blessing, because everyone else I talk to is wishing them straight to hell... You raise a very valid point - the ONP has great potential to clean up the abuse you mentioned. However, that abuse was mainly levelled towards citizens of certain nations, whose qualifications (or other criteria, as determined by the NMC) were not satisfactory to allow immediate full registration. My perspective is that of a nurse from a country whose nationals were previously admitted direct to the register and whose education/qualifications are comparable to those required of British nurses. My grievance is that the NMC is making an already complicated process more difficult in the name of being politically correct. Why not subject adaptation programs to greater scrutiny (please also note, that there is a big difference between the supervised adaptation programs and the 20 day ONP). Lastly, the thing that sent me the loopiest, was the fact that they introduced this program in such a careless way, resulting in potentially tens of thousands of potential registrants being left without places in a mandatory program. Madness. I've arrived in the UK now, still haven't been able to enrol in an ONP, and considering the state of the NHS, am rather happy about how it's all worked out. I've abandoned nursing altogether and am working as a legal assistant (I'm a law student) instead - better money, better conditions, and no bloody NMC to contend with!!!