I just finished reading a newspaper article about three ICU nurses, in Texas, who were fired for refusing to take on three patients. One of the nurse's complained that she was assigned a fresh CABG, that was located some distance from her other two critically ill patients. The other two nurses had similar complaints. Perhaps someone from Dallas can give us all some more information. Texas has a portion of their law called Safe Harbor. And nurse who feels she is assigned an unreasonable, unsafe number of patients can put her objections in writing and it will be reviewed, I believe by the Texas BON. But the nurse must continue to work in what she considers an unsafe patient environment until the review is done and a report issued. I may be a bit dense but how does this protect both the nurse and the patients she is responsible for?
It has been years since I worked in ICU and I was assigned to a room, that held four patients. Frequently I was the only nurse assigned to that room. My patients were on vent, multiple IVs, fresh post ops in critical condition, car accident survivors. And if I was assigned to the end room, I was responsible for one of the two dialysis patients receiving dialysis. It was a mad house and the two years I did it, I was fortunate that no patient die because I was the only nurse assigned to the room.
Is this the way that state nursing boards protect their nurses? It looks to me as if they are protecting the employer. And they certainly are not protecting the patient. Last July, when I spent twenty-one days in ICU, I was fortunate to have one nurse assigned to me from 7AM to 7PM. And from 7PM to 7AM, I share my nurse with another patient. I never felt that my life was placed in any danger but if I had been one of those three Texas patients, not only would I have been in danger but so wouldn't have been my nurse. I thought that staffing in ICU was suppose to be 2:1. Not 3:1 or 4:1. Is this par for the course, these days?
