Anyone else being GPS tracked?

OMG í ½í¸®

In PA, we were told it's to cut down on physical paperwork. And supposedly make it easier for Recovery Trek.

I'm not always a 'conspiracy theorist' but this is ridiculous. Government, companies (verizon, AT&T) etc already have way too much personal data at their disposal. They certainly do not need more. The whole 'big brother is watching'

(Sorry to rant a bit)

That is ridiculous, I can't imagine that can be legal, but they have us by the short and curlies, don't they? They can pretty much do whatever they want and we'll take it because we want to keep our license. Ugh, I HATE this.

If this were me, I would turn off location services on my phone at all times, except for the minute that I needed to check in to the AA meeting using the GPS tracking feature. Idk, maybe I'd need to keep it on the whole hour if there's a requirement to check out at the end of the meeting as well. But after that I'd turn it off. It would def be a hardship because location services allows me to navigate routes, search for stores/services based on my location etc. So I'd be annoyed every time I wanted to do one of those things, but at least they couldn't track me in between AA meetings.

I'm sure if we complained they would say we were being non compliant and close our files then we would be screwed! But I am tempted to get rid of my smartphone and get a basic one..then they can't track me and they sure as heck can demand I have a smartphone!

"I'm sorry, I can't afford the bill for a smartphone because the restriction placed on me make it so that I can't find a job that pays more than minimum wage.'

I did not commit any crime and I am not wearing an ankle bracelet. These idiots are not probation officers. Yeah, in my opinion an awful lot of what they require is a violation of civil rights (separation of church and state, etc, etc) but tracking my movements? Oh, **** no!!!! That one is beyond the pale.

Affinity has a thing where you can do your meeting calendar by pulling up the app and ticking an "I am at this meeting" and it pings your location and adds it to your calendar. That's lovely and convenient but not something I do because going to these things is major anxiety inducing endeavor and pulling out my phone to log it on time is not a priority.besides I go to the same bloody ones every week.

What company? Is it still affinity or someone else or is ISNAP now something entirely different? I'm grateful I never had to deal with that horse ****. That is absolutely insane.

NO. No no no.

Nowhere in any of the rules/provisions governing ISNAP, and I'm sure nowhere in any nurse's contact, does it state that a third party administrator, the Indiana BON or any other entity has the right to monitor your location at any time. That is a blatant violation of laws governing a person's right to privacy. Monitoring a nurse for substance abuse is one thing---crossing the line into monitoring their location AT ALL TIMES is another. They have no right to track nurses using GPS.

I would outright refuse. I would have a MAJOR problem with enabling a third party access to my cell phone. That's what happens when you allow anyone access to your location with your cell phone. They have the ability to hack into your cell phone. If nurses allow this & consent to it, there is no end to what they will want access to---your email & password, your Facebook ID & password, your phone number to monitor your text messages, etc. By agreeing to allow a third party administrator to track your location, it is practically impossible to retract your implied consent once you allow it. Refusing to participate in this---and every single nurse in the ISNAP program should refuse---preserves nurses' right to maintain their privacy. Just because you're in a monitoring program, which is personally invasive as it is, does not give any governmental agency or third party administrator an automatic right to monitor your every movement. That is ludicrous.

ISNAP cannot possibly kick out every nurse that refuses to allow a third party administrator of the state monitoring program access to their location 24/7.

I also think this should be brought to the attention of the media. The public should be aware of the invasiveness of these programs, as well as the restrictions that make getting a job almost impossible & the financial devastation that these programs cause. In addition, how BON's treat nurses with substance abuse issues as the scum of the earth instead of human beings that happen to be in the percentage of the eternal public that suffer from substance abuse. The rules governing ISNAP are very specific, especially concerning the evaluation & a specific DSM-IV diagnosis for a nurse to qualify for ISNAP. When requiring a DSM-IV diagnosis, this means that ISNAP is looking for a legitimate DISEASE to justify their requirement for a nurse to participate in the program or lose their license. A DISEASE is not treated as a moral failing or purposeful act, a DISEASE is not stigmatized or a reason to harass or abuse a nurse physically, mentally or emotionally---that includes financially. Driving a nurse into financial ruin, bankruptcy, welfare & massive debt does nothing to help with recovery & staying sober.

The unfair bullying of nurses to enter into these programs or lose their licenses where there is not a disease to be treated should also be in the mainstream news, but it isn't. This includes all licensed professionals---physicians, physical therapists, etc.---and it is not targeted at nurses. These "monitoring programs" have turned into a HUGE business, and licensing board programs are feeding this giant industry. A lot is coming out about physicians & drug testing centers committing insurance fraud & making a crap ton of money from it. There was just a big bust in Florida involving "sober living" facilities, with a well-known psychiatrist in Palm Beach being federally indicted for fraud. I know him, actually---I hope he lives in a cell for many years because all he ever cared about was money. It took quite a while, but they finally got him. He was indicted on 2 charges, one carrying a 20 year max sentence and the other a 10 year max sentence. I would love to see him get the full 30, but I doubt he will. Although, due to the massive amount of urine drug screens he prescribed for the people at the sober living residences that netted the company over $30 million, you never know.