Okay, I fully expect to be slammed for this. What do all these posts about gaming the system to get early results say about the character of some of the new grads/nurse candidates? One of the prime requisites of being a nurse is good judgement. Boasting about or encouraging fraudulent behavior by using inaccurate or inadequate credit card information to get test results hours or days quicker does not speak well of one's judgement and maturity. Is this what we accept from our colleagues?
It may be harsh but I think this is a matter of integrity. I understand impatience very well, I understand wanting to know if all the work of school paid off, what I don't understand is how easily one can ignore the lessons of integrity and professionalism.
If one can lie to a faceless testing company how one respond when faced with a potential life threatening situation that requires, patience, integrity, and maturity. It's a slippery slope, a little harmless deception here may reveal character issues that come to light when real harm may be caused.
So, slam me, flame me, whatever, or I hope some will agree with me.
If one can lie to a faceless testing company how one respond when faced with a potential life threatening situation that requires, patience, integrity, and maturity. It's a slippery slope, a little harmless deception here may reveal character issues that come to light when real harm may be caused.
Personally, this seems like an odd inference to make. Slippery slope arguments are fraught with peril (see: gay marriage will lead to people marrying ducks). There is no rational reason to believe that the way a person behaves in a situation with low risk (that is, virtually no consequences if they use a fake/expired CC#) is at all reflective of how they would behave in a situation with high risk. By that rationale we should expect someone who goes 5 miles over the speed limit in a 25mph zone to go even faster in a school zone, but that's not usually what happens.
People, very generally speaking, try to make wise risk-benefit judgments. Risk and benefit modulate one another. A very large benefit is worth a large risk to some people, but a large risk with no benefit isn't worth it to anyone. By the same token, virtually all low risk situations are acceptable to people, because it doesn't take much benefit to tip the scales. The PVT is a low risk situation. I don't know how much comfort they get from it, but it only has to be more than "almost none" to be worth the risk of "almost none."
I also think that, whatever is wrong with the Kids These Days, if the PVT had existed 20 years ago the kids those days would have done it, too... because impulsive behavior and pursuit of instant gratification are analogous with young people, regardless of their generation. Frontal lobe myelination, dontchaknow.
So there you go. It shouldn't surprise anyone that people try the PVT, and it probably says little or nothing about them as nurses.
Using invalid credit card info intentionally is dishonest. Whether you think it's okay to do or not, it is dishonest. Submitting authorization for payment that you do not intend to pay is dishonest.
Yes, I believe this reflects on integrity.
Not to mention the fact that then your cc could be flagged by the fraud department of your credit card company, you could end up with a hold on your card, or if intentionally swapping numbers or some other nonsense, someone else could end up in a bit of a mess.
A tad off subject, however, I recently learned of these funds that are set up to help people are a hot bed of this kind of activity. Someone puts in cc information the same kind of way, has their "name in lights" so their neighbors, friends and such on social media are just so impressed at the level of help that a person is willing to give, only to then "dispute" the charges so that the person to which is was intended then has to pay a charge/fee.
It will only be a matter of time before the NCLEX will go up in price to cover these charge back fees, that a person's interest rate on the cc goes up for inaccurate activity, or some other monetary charge for activity that is scammy in nature.
Interestingly, there is a phone number option that one can call I believe it was 48 hours after taking the test. It is an additional charge. So if the motive is actually getting results as opposed to getting the results for free, there are other options.
And that is my issue with it. Why put things out there that one has no intention of honoring?
I think it would be great if Pearson started forwarding this info to the respective BON of the candidate. Pehaps a little exposure will give a little perspective
Actually from what I understand, wouldn't it be like fraudulently using a check that you knew was going to bounce? That's against the law still if I'm right.
Actually from what I understand, wouldn't it be like fraudulently using a check that you knew was going to bounce? That's against the law still if I'm right.
No it is not against the law.
Some DA will not mess with bounced checks, just depends on where you live......
Good thing "did you do the Pearson-Vue trick?" isn't a standard interview question.
I have strong feelings about judging someone's entire character based on a single act of "dishonesty." It's dishonest to say you weigh 125 lbs on your driver's license when you really weigh 145, too.
Who send entire?
I also think lying on a drivers license is pointless. Neither the cop nor the bartender are looking at that. God knows the DMV doesn't care.
I am really glad someone started this thread. It has been gnawing on me for a while. I completely agree that anytime someone wants to put in fraudulent information for some instant gratification does lack some integrity. Anyone who recommends supplying fraudulent information also does lack integrity. People who are entering incorrect information to foil the system are KNOWINGLY attempting to trick the system. This is a conscious act people are taking,
If people want to try the PVT, have enough guts to enter in the correct information, risk the charge.
As for what PedsRn stated, I tend to worry about own character, and don't worry about what other people do with their lives.
However in nursing something your co-workers may do can impact you and your work, or the unit you are working on. If one person decides to do something that lacks character, commit an error, it does impact others
Pizzes me off to no end. And I've said so in the past and gotten completely ripped apart by new grads who "see nothing wrong with it".
Okay, I fully expect to be slammed for this. What do all these posts about gaming the system to get early results say about the character of some of the new grads/nurse candidates? One of the prime requisites of being a nurse is good judgement. Boasting about or encouraging fraudulent behavior by using inaccurate or inadequate credit card information to get test results hours or days quicker does not speak well of one's judgement and maturity. Is this what we accept from our colleagues?
It may be harsh but I think this is a matter of integrity. I understand impatience very well, I understand wanting to know if all the work of school paid off, what I don't understand is how easily one can ignore the lessons of integrity and professionalism.
If one can lie to a faceless testing company how one respond when faced with a potential life threatening situation that requires, patience, integrity, and maturity. It's a slippery slope, a little harmless deception here may reveal character issues that come to light when real harm may be caused.
So, slam me, flame me, whatever, or I hope some will agree with me.
Dogen
897 Posts
Personally, this seems like an odd inference to make. Slippery slope arguments are fraught with peril (see: gay marriage will lead to people marrying ducks). There is no rational reason to believe that the way a person behaves in a situation with low risk (that is, virtually no consequences if they use a fake/expired CC#) is at all reflective of how they would behave in a situation with high risk. By that rationale we should expect someone who goes 5 miles over the speed limit in a 25mph zone to go even faster in a school zone, but that's not usually what happens.
People, very generally speaking, try to make wise risk-benefit judgments. Risk and benefit modulate one another. A very large benefit is worth a large risk to some people, but a large risk with no benefit isn't worth it to anyone. By the same token, virtually all low risk situations are acceptable to people, because it doesn't take much benefit to tip the scales. The PVT is a low risk situation. I don't know how much comfort they get from it, but it only has to be more than "almost none" to be worth the risk of "almost none."
I also think that, whatever is wrong with the Kids These Days, if the PVT had existed 20 years ago the kids those days would have done it, too... because impulsive behavior and pursuit of instant gratification are analogous with young people, regardless of their generation. Frontal lobe myelination, dontchaknow.
So there you go. It shouldn't surprise anyone that people try the PVT, and it probably says little or nothing about them as nurses.
Faithfully yours,
A nerd.