wildtime88

fiestynurse, Thanks for the follow up. Please keep us informed as you find out more. There is one thing I am really unclear of. Just how do you start an IV and then hook up a non IV tube to it? Can you fill us or me in on that since you have seen them?

JT, if you think it is hilarious to post something that says that other nurses do not care if the patients they are caring for live or die, then I truly feel sorry for you. I would feel the same way it someone else posted a similar thing in reference to union nurses. As I asked you before, is your next post going to be some kind of statement that other nurses are intentionally killing patients? One more thing, no one's husband posted that here on this board. YOU did. If a non-nurse had posted it then that might have been written off as to they just do not comprehend what they are saying. But for a nurse to post something like that, well that is another story entirely.

Yes, I have. There are many states that are walk through states. It usually takes about 2 hours for the process to be complete while they verify your lincensure status and everything else. I see nothing wrong with uncovering dangerous situations in any facility strike or no stike, but I do have a problem with a witch hunt. This is not unsimilar to a group of nurse trying to discredit a new nurse on a floor that they have taken a personal dislike to. I have seen this before and I am sure you have too. I do understand the frustration involved, but things like this go way to far and are not good for nursing in general. This does not build trust in nurses. This just makes every patient worry that much more even after the strike is settled. They know that some of the nurses who work there on a regular basis actually cross the picket lines. We have all known nurses that we were not good but it is not focused on one particular group. Many of the nurses who work strikes are regular staff in another part of the country.

It is more than obvious that you do not see the meaning behind my post at https://allnurses.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12873 How can you battle against and exclude nurses one day and then expect them to side with you the next? How can you trash nurses one day then expect them to be your friend the next? How does this promote unity within the nursing profession as a whole?

I have a license in many states. I have yet to recieve a licence without the new state board of nursing verifying my existing licensing status with all the other states. This includes existing or previous complaints against it. As for travel nursing in general, I have a written verification as to all my previous experience. When it comes to actually hiring someone for a position, that is usually done through corresponding with human resources and simply a question of yes they worked here from such date to such date and a yes or no to a rehire question. And before you even go there, I have never worked a strike. I am not defending scabs as you call them. I am defending other nurses.

Do not even go there with you insinuations. This is an individual incident. I bet if I search hard enough I could find a past story or incident that envolved a union nurse. Would that mean that all union nurses were bad or that someone did not screen them properly. NO, it would not. If one nurse does something like this or even intentionally kills a patient does that make the whole profession bad. No, it does not. This nurse went through all the checks that any nurse would have to pass to work in the state. He could have just as easily have moved into the state and passed the same requirements. In fact, he could have come to your union facility and been hired as regular staff. lets just file your comments and attitude in the same respect as the ones posted here https://allnurses.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12873

fiestynurse, You got a raw deal. But you are still a personal hero to me.

Besides the alleged drug use. I wonder if this was packaged in a regular syringe and was added to an IV bag. Some hospital are pharmacies are still using this packaging system for liquid oral medications. I wonder if it was in the norm to make up your own IV bags here as well. Surely this guy checked the route in the order. We make up "yellow banana' bags all day long in the ER. The IV MVI sometimes comes out of a multi dose vial. This was pretty stupid if the guy gave this IV push through one of those off set liquid syringes. Even more stupid if he drew it up and then gave it. If he was acually high when he gave it, then he deserves to stand trial. Please keep us posted as more comes out on this.

I have worked in many hospitals where if a sitter was needed then you lost a nursing assistant. The worse part of that was that many of these places ran on bare staffing requirements to begin with. On 3rd shift if you lost your nursing assistant and did not have a clerk plus all the other crap, then you were truly up the creek without a paddle or a life jacket. I worked at one hospital where they did not consider a ETOH of 0.345 and the patient being on a fresh Cardizem Drip as a need to have a sitter in the room. They actually said the guy would have to get out of bed and fall before he would warrant a sitter to protect his safety. This was during a stint on a tele floor. When I told them I would not accept the patient and be responsible for him under their terms and conditions, they told me that I had no choice. I told them if that was the case that I would take the patient but it would be my last night to work there. Bottom line it was my last night. They were very short staffed on nurses and I was suppose to work the next 3 nights in a row. To top it off the charge nurse who was short of patients would not take the patient. By the way it was the charge nurse and the nursing supervisor who said I had to take the patient. My hands were already full.

I actually did this a couple of years ago. There are many companies that offer these services. The best way to find out who is available in your area is to contact all your local life insurance agents. You are paid based on the services you provide with each separate applicant. The service can range from a simple health questionnaire, a blood draw, collecting a urine specimen, an EKG, or any combination of these. Some companies provide a drop off location for you to use a centrifuge to spin the blood as well as pay for shipping of the collection kits. Other companies require you to buy or lease a centrifuge and pay for shipping of your kits. Some companies pay a flat rate charge for each a service while others pay on a sliding scale based on productivity for the month. Applicants are sometimes hard to schedule and will not flex in the time they are available which can mean a lot of driving and night hours traveling directly to their home. Some are more than willing to come to your home or meet you at the company's office or insurance office. There is a physician's order to perform the testing, but you never see it. The insurance companies also contract with physicians who supply the needed orders.

There is another treatment that is said to be very effective with the pain associated with this condition. There is a paste that is made from hot peppers that is then applied to the affected area. Evidently it does causes a burning sensation at first, but then later actually numbs the area. The effects can last for weeks at a time.

I have also worked at many hospitals in the U.S. where I have had to wake up residents and ER attendings who were actually provided a room with a bed to sleep in while the nurses where told they could not take a nap even on their breaks. These physicians were viewed as professionals, but some how you suggest that a nurse who takes a nap on their own time is not? These physicians were even on the clock and housekeeping cleaned and changed the linens for them.

No jt, I am not loosing my edge. I am just tired of messing with you. Everyone can read the code for him or herself and determine them for their selves. You gave very little logic in your argument and when it all boiled down to it you stated you are not going to follow these codes either as they are written. You disagree with them and you basically denounce them as a member of the ANA. Remember with codes of ethics, if you denounce one, then it is no different then denouncing them all. I disagree with a few of them, but then I am not actually bound by these rules/codes and when it all said and done, the only thing they can actually do to you for denouncing them is to take away your membership. We both know that will never happen. What was really interesting in this tread was all the people who were fighting to say that they were following the ANA's code of ethics and coming up with this or that. When all they actually had to say was, who cares? 93% of the U.S. say this all the time by not supporting the ANA and that is the reality. That leaves 93% of the nurses in the U.S. looking for leadership that they will actively stand behind and support. The person with the CNA summed it all too well, but he/she is lucky enough to have a good leadership in place and their number of members and active member ship reflects that. Their percentage when compared to the area they represent far out numbers anything the ANA has ever accomplished. For the rest of us in all but a few states, it is either the ANA or nothing. The majority of the nurses choose nothing. This is not my interpretation, this is the fact. If the leadership of the ANA also interprets the code of ethics as you do, then there is no legitimate reason or fact for not rallying all nurses, both non-union and union alike, in the same tactics as they condone in the in the UAN? There is also no legitimate excuse for the separation or exclusion of one entity from the other from a national organization who claims to represent all nurses equally. So now here we go back full circle again and I am sure the double talk will also start back up. Remember there are nurses out there who do not belong to unions and who might not ever or can not convince enough nurses to form one. They are looking for leadership who will not exclude them by putting them into categories of union or non-union as far what tactic and how much they will be offered when it comes to leadership. The ANA can not continue to do this and expect for nurses to honor their codes or anything else they happen to come up with. 93% are already saying, "so what, who cares". They have seen and continue to see where they actually stand. They stand for the most part alone, at least where it counts. All the safe needle and ergonomic legislation in the world will make a very small dent in how they feel. All of the nurses I know are very smart and safe when it comes to handling sharp objects. I do now that this recruitment legislation will be felt if it passes before the problems are actually resolved. There will be a whole lot of hopes for a true change that will go up in smoke. This is the reality of the legislation being urged on by the ANA before the problems are actually resolved. This will provide the worst employers with new nurses because this is where the nursing shortages are the worse. This is where nurses have left in protest and refuse to go back. Of course, this is all based on logic. Here is a simple logic problem for you. If you are out in a boat and spring a big leak and you can't get back to shore. What do you do first, bail out the water that is rushing in or repair the leak? Here is another one. If you are in a war and you want to get from point A to point B but there is an enemy machine gun in the middle that is wounding every person you gets near it. What do you do, continue to send more people or focus on wiping out the machine gun. The other choice would be to continue to send more people with hopes of wiping out the machine gun one day. This last choice is the action that is being taken by the ANA.

I tell you what jt, sit down and rewrite all the codes by changing words and the meanings to convey what was intended to be written. Start from the very first because we all know, at least most of do, that each code is just as important as the next when it comes to a code of ethics. Most of us know you can not violate one code of ethics to satisfy another. That in it's self would be unethical And any person who did it would be unethical in doing so. So go for it. You rewrite the ANA's "Code of Ethics" for all the nurses in country to follow. Why not there is not much difference between 1 person wrighting the code as the is less than 8% of he nurses adopting it and saying everyone has to follow it. You seem to have no problems as a member of the ANA disregarding an ethical standard here or there to do what you want.

fergus51, are you saying that these codes are so braod that individuals can interpret them to mean many things? Even though they are written in precise language with one building into the next one? Are you saying as JT has, that the words that were used are different from the people who wrote these were actually intending to write? So that someone who read these codes and was not there when they were actually written, would have to use their powers of ESP and disregard the actual words and their meanings to understand them?

WashYaHands, actually a collective action can take many forms other than a strike or walkout. It can be collective bargaining, protesting, a rally for political purposes, a petition, a mass meeting with administration, etc. The language used in the first code sets the groundwork for what is ethical and what is not. Remember it states "primary Commitment" not secondary or another ambiguous term. "Primary" means "most important" or "first". Are you suggesting that the first code is meaningless when dealing with the others? Then just what kind of ethical code would that be?

Jt, again there is no personal interpretation here. The language and wording used in the ANA's "Codes of Ethics" is clear and precise so that everyone who reads it will understand it. There are no exceptions to these codes elaborated or referred. Even the code that talks about unions does not authorize a strike action or walk out. It only discusses collective bargaining and that in it's self has nothing to do with a strike or walk out. This is intended to prevent someone saying as you have, "I know that what the nurse members of the ANA intended when they wrote it." You can not write a "Code of Ethics" for everyone to follow with the notion that they will understand the intention behind it. That is ridiculous. When you write something as important as this, you do the best job you can at making it very clear and not subject to misinterpretations. Codes of Conduct as well as other rules are based on ethical codes. . So if you do not have to follow the "Code of Ethics" as it is written, because as you say, you know it's true intention and it is not in agreement with what is actually written, then why should anyone else? Then the whole "Code of Ethics" is worthless and does not apply to anyone. Has the president of the ANA urged nurses to strike since this "Code of Ethics" was adopted? The past is irrelevant prior to the adoption of these codes. If she has, then she is violating the "Code of Ethics" as they are written. Maybe like you she knows what "was intended to be written". This would really make these ethical codes meaningless. There is a big difference between intending and actually writing and adopting. I intended to make a million dollars today. I intended to go Christmas shopping today. I intended to mow the lawn today. I did none of those. All I have to show for the day is what I actually did. Actually JT, I think you have learn how to use the art of double talk pretty well and that seems to go a long ways in the ANA just like the other topics I posted discusses and referenced here discuss.

By providing only minimum staffing for life and death cases, other patients go without needed medical treatment if staffing is not bolstered by replacement nurses. Of course this does not sound so bad if you are in an area where another facility has both the staffing and beds available for all the patients who are turned away /rerouted. This is not the case in most of the areas of the country and it is well known. So again the nurse who strike are acting unethically according to the ANA's "Code of Ethics" by not fulfilling their "primary commitment". They are jeopardizing the health and safety of the community and some people would even argue rights. This is also a violation of this individual code: "The nurse promotes, advocates for, and strives to protect the health, safety, and rights of the patient." As we have already seen the patient has been well defined by this code: "The nurse's primary commitment is to the patient, whether an individual, family, group, or community."

hoolahan, according to most union nurses who go on strike. The last thing they want is for replacement nurses to come in. So how does that make it ethical on the union nurse's part. It doesn't according to the ANA's "Code of Ethics". The other thing to consider is that the striking organization does not line up it's own replacements in order to ensure that there is actually enough replacement to cover for them. So in actuality, these nurse's are walking out and abandoning their "primary commitment" without knowing if there is anyone to cover the patients they are leaving behind or the community at large. As such they are committing an ethical violation against the ANA's existing "Code of Ethics" and as such acting unethically.

According to the ANA's recently adopted "Code of Ethics" put into place for all nurses within the profession to follow, there is nothing left to debate. A striking nurse is performing an unethical act by forsaking their "primary commitment". A replacement nurse is acting ethically by stepping in to help fullfil the "primary commitment" that was abandoned. The language used is precise and very clear without anything added in to justify an exception on this topic. The debate is over according to the "Code of Ethics". If the ANA's "Code of Ethics" is followed, thus no ethical violations, there will be no more strikes or need for replacement nurses.

Here is another one of the individual codes: "The nurse promotes, advocates for, and strives to protect the health, safety, and rights of the patient. " I have heard this same reason/arguement used by replacement nurses many times in the past. Last year, these codes were not officially adopted. They only became effective within the last 6 months. So in reality, it is a whole new ball game. Of cource, the ANA can go aganst the code that it officially adopted. If they did, then they would be in violation of their own ethical code that they want all nurses to follow. In short, they would be acting unethically. I am sure that these codes were well thought out and discussed by many in the ANA before they were adopted by the organization as a whole. To go back now and change them would be a little shady, to say the least.

We all know that a code of ethics is not subject to a personal interpretation by an individual or an individual group. Nor can you pick and choose which code you follow and do not under different circumstances. Each individual code is as important as every other code. They are not weighted nor are they ranked in importance. In Short, if you break one ethical code on a list then you are being unethical even if you follow all the rest. There is no such thing as being a little unethical just as there is no such thing as being a little guilty. It is black or white, you either are or you are not behaving unethically. In example, if it is unethical to assist in a suicide under a code of ethics, then no mater what the circumstances, it is still unethical. Also with the same example in hand, it does not mater how many people are participating in the act, because it is still a violation of an ethical code. The dictionary defines the word "ethic" as the following: eth-ic (thk) n. 1. a. A set of principles of right conduct. b. A theory or a system of moral values: "An ethic of service is at war with a craving for gain" (Gregg Easterbrook). 1. ethics (used with a sing. verb) The study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by a person; moral philosophy. 2. ethics (used with a sing. or pl. verb) The rules or standards governing the conduct of a person or the members of a profession: medical ethics. ethic n 1: the principles of right and wrong that are accepted by an individual or a social group; "the Puritan ethic"; "a person with old-fashioned values" [syn: moral principle, value-system, value orientation] 2: a system of principles governing morality and acceptable conduct [syn: ethical code] http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=ethic The following is from the code of ethics recently approved and accepted by the ANA: "The nurse's primary commitment is to the patient, whether an individual, family, group, or community." https://allnurses.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12342 This code is straight forward and uses strict and specific language. I have emphasized two words so that there can be no mistake as to it's meaning. The word is primary not to be anyway confused with secondary or any other meaning. The other word is community. It is well known that a community is based on perception and there are no defined physical boundaries. The term "global community" has even become common place. In this individual code you will not find the word or phrases "except" or "in case of" or any other variation used to later nullify it. So by strict definition, which any code of ethics is based on, it is unethical for nurses to strike or walk out thus turning their back to their "primary commitment". It is also ethical for another nurse to step in to fulfill the "primary commitment", that other nurses have forsaken, to the "community". Oh I can hear everyone now saying to themselves, "hey what about the nurses union (UAN) within the ANA. According to the "Code of Ethic", it is not unethical to be a member of and/or use collective bargaining. It only becomes unethical when nurses strike or otherwise walk out and forsake their primary commitment. Many of the other codes included in the ANA's "Code of Ethics" continue to strengthen this position. I can also hear, "A while back the president or the ANA went to jail for actively joining and participating in a strike, does that mean that she was acting unethically and against the ANA code?" To answer this you first have to remember that this code was only recently adopted. So the answer would be no. If she did this today or in anyway encouraged a strike or walkout, then yes she would be acting unethically and directly against the established ANA's "Code of ethics". Now here is a good question for everyone? Morals and ethics are ever changing and are based on the majority's perception of right and wrong. Is it actually ethical for a small minority of less than 8% to establish the rules and/or codes for the overwhelming majority to follow, or do these rules/codes only hold true and binding for the small minority of nurses who are actually members? Well I found the answer for the question that I posted earlier, even though it still lacks in a answer for past conduct and lack of action. https://allnurses.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12130 Now if this seems like a bunch of double talk, then you need to also look at the following: https://allnurses.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12321 One more thing to remember is that a "Code of Conduct" can never override/overrule a "Code of Ethics".

Jenny you are right on the money. If you are to go restraint free, then you must have the staff to do it safely.

First, relax Just answer the questions they ask you truthfully. If you do not know the answer then look it up or find someone who can. I love it when JACHO is coming through staffing is optimal even on the night shift. In fact, there are so many staff you almost trip over them because you are not use to it. JACHO reps just go along with it like it is the normal situation and then leave. They know how to play the game and are well rewarded by the luxury treatment they receive. As a traveler, I have been trough about 6 JACHO inspections in the last 3 years.