targa

Who cares what your mother wants?!? It's your life. You make your own decisions. Apply for financial aid... get a part-time job, and go to school. Learn to stand up to people now. It will serve you well when you're older.

The Aiken article has been thoroughly vetted... it is a watershed. I think the bottom line is................. that BSN nurses are better prepared to think critically, a process which improves patient outcome. The writing is on the wall... and sooner or later states will begin requiring that new grads have a BSN. Some teaching hospitals are trying to achieve an all-BSN workforce. While some might say that that goal is unrealistic, I don't think it's a stretch to say that, all things being equal, a unit manager will hire a BSN over an ADN any day. I personally know a lot of nurse managers, and I know what they're looking for. There might come a time, sooner than we think, when ADN nurses will be considered nothing more than "technicians", and BSN nurses will be making all the important patient-care decisions (as well as managing). This is not a fantasy; this debate is going on right now at my nursing school. The nurses who control the state boards and professional associations are, for the most part, BSN-educated and higher. The line is already in the sand.....................

Just a note about a couple of things: 1. True random drug tests are computer-generated; the names are chosen by a complex computer algorithm. If a unit manager gets info from an outside source that a nurse might be doing drugs off-premises, she has 2 choices: (1) gather info the RIGHT way, via her own observations and those of other nurses, all of which are documented, which can then lead to a direct request for a drug test; or (2) she can ask people to take a "random" drug test, which includes the suspect. However, if the nurse in question hires a competent lawyer, and the lawyer finds out that the test wasn't truly random, then the hospital is going to be in trouble. 2. I wouldn't live in Texas for all the money in the world. I don't need anyone to tell me how to live my life outside of work. There's an old saying: "If you wanna run my life, then pay my bills".

What an interesting thread: https://allnurses.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=112202 Hmmm....

Yes, and if you'll read one of my prior posts, my own suggestion was that the OP contact the unit manager of miss coke-head, and suggest that she keep an eye out for unusual behavior or declining performance, WITHOUT naming names. A complaint to the BON would be useless. Once a unit manager is aware of a potential problem, the problem will reveal itself in due time, if in fact there is one.

Thanks, Leslie. I'm glad I was able to change one mind. It's a tough issue, but then, if it were easy there would be no disagreement. Peace!

That's right: management will take the information (and yes, it really IS a rumor... a report from a non-employee about off-premises behavior) and the nurse in question will be watched. And eventually she will be tested, after management compiles some HARD evidence of her declining performance and unusual behavior. You and I aren't that far apart. The end result will be the same: she'll be disciplined and offered rehab. We differ on the route taken... the right way takes more time, but the right way sticks when it is challenged. One really doesn't have to have a license and 10 years in an ICU to understand this.

You obviously have a reading problem, Ms. Fish. I AGREE that if she's impaired, she shouldn't be caring for patients. I've never written anything to the contrary. You ARE uninformed about the legal protections afforded to employees. You evaded my direct challenge: just what is it about due process that you don't like? Employers can't make employment decisions, like who should be drug-tested, on the basis of rumor and innuendo. I don't need to have a PhD in nursing to understand that. I know enough about "the realities" of nursing to discuss this issue intelligently and responsibly. I've worked directly with hospital HR personnel and nurse managers about this very issue. You really don't know what you're talking about. You are responding on an emotional level ("oh my god, what about the patient?!?") which probably explains why you are probably not in nursing management, because your emotional decision to order a nurse to submit to drug testing on the basis of rumor, without more, would likely have adverse consequences for the hospital. I fail to see how my student status impacts the weight and worthiness of my statements. Think before you write.

I don't take anything personally. I'm providing correct information to people who obviously are uninformed. I would agree that if the nurse in question has a drug addiction which is affecting her job performance, she should not be taking care of patients. Where you and I apparently part company is the manner in which her employer should determine her suitability for continued employment. I believe in due process for everyone, not just for everyone who is spotless in behavior. The end (ensuring a safe environment for patients) does not justify the means (forcing someone to take a drug test on the basis of rumor). You would feel the same way if you were falsely accused of doing something and your job was on the line. By the way, I don't need luck... I'm doing quite well in nursing school. But thanks for the sentiment.

EXACTLY

I practiced law for over 22 years, and served as counsel to hospitals and other health-care organizations. I have written drug-testing guidelines for hospital facilities on the west coast. In addition, I continue to read professional journals and cases regarding employment law. I KNOW what goes on behind the scenes in most health-care workplaces. You know only about the demands made upon your co-workers, in one specific facility that contractually required compliance with a request for immediate testing. Most facilities have no such requirement. I don't have a problem with random drug testing, or testing of applicants for unfilled positions. I really don't see what my status as a nursing student has to do with the discussion. What's your point?

People can contract to do anything. I never stated otherwise. Most hospitals have not required nurses to comply with an immediate and unexplained demand for drug testing. I doubt that many will be doing so in the future. This might be possible where an employer is "the only game in town". Personally, I would never work for such a facility. By the way, since your behavior is spotless, how about let's install a camera or two in your home? Since you don't do anything wrong, what's the problem?

The problem might be your reliance on religion to get you through problems, rather than rational thought. Freud made a compelling argument that religious thought is a form of mental illness. Read "Future of an Illusion" (1927). http://www.nyfreudian.org/abstracts/abs_volumes/vol-21.htm

"The Mgr will have that nurse doing drug screening faster than her head can spin!" No... that's just not gonna happen. A sordid tale of a "nurse displaying illegal activity in public" sounds so compellingly damning, but it's simply not enough to cause HR and the nurse manager to initiate a drug screening. I'm amazed at the number of nurses who don't understand the concept of "due process". Maybe the nursing schools should be teaching a course in basic principles of law. One may not be compelled to give evidence against himself/herself in a workplace investigation unless there is reasonable suspicion that the person is using illegal narcotics. The definition of "reasonable suspicion" has filled tens of thousands of pages of court decisions, but suffice it to say that it does NOT exist where the only evidence in support of reasonable suspicion is the statement of a witness regarding what he/she has allegedly seen. Otherwise, every one of us could maliciously cause harm to innocent persons by claiming to see something we did not, thereby initiating an investigation into someone's life. Large employers such as hospitals have to comply with a huge and complicated assortment of state and federal law regarding employees... like the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the ADA (disabilities), ADEA (age), OSHA regulations, the federal Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988, DOT drug testing regulations, and privacy laws and regulations. In addition, there is the matter of union contracts and other employee agreements. If hospitals do not properly initiate investigations of employee conduct, there are huge ramifications in the form of claims for defamation, infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery, malicious prosecution, invasion of privacy, and retaliation. The most common and accepted basis for beginning an investigation and requesting a drug test is well-documented evidence by a supervisor and fellow employees of work performance and behavioral problems on the job site. I have advised both employers and employees regarding workplace investigations. One cannot demand that an employee take a drug test simply because a stranger has orally reported an employee's off-premises use of what appears to be a controlled substance. If you believe otherwise, you are sadly and naively mistaken.

I'd like to point out three short phrases upon which this whole matter turns: 1. "physiological or psychological dependence": there is evidence of usage here, but not of dependence; 2. "upon probable cause": probable cause will not exist if based solely upon the word of [an admittedly biased] single witness; and 3. "substantial evidence that a professional has an active addictive disease": the OP's testimony alone would not constitute substantial evidence, nor do there appear to be facts tending to show "addictive disease", as opposed to occasional use. I don't mean to be a contrarian; we are a nation of laws... and nursing is a tightly-regulated profession where standards of conduct are judged by legal norms. While I certainly wouldn't want a coke addict tending to me in an ICU, absolutely nothing will be gained by making a report to the BON. If I were the OP, I would do this (and read carefully): I would visit my friend, the DON (or unit manager, I forget who it is), and suggest that she pay close attention to whether one of her employees is under the influence of an illegal substance while on the job... nothing more need be said. I'm willing to bet that some people have already noticed a few things about someone. Take it from there.