Below are excerpts from an article in today’s Los Angeles Times.
More than 30 states allow nonmedical school employees to administer insulin to students, said a representative of the American Diabetes Assn.
Several nursing organizations filed suit, arguing that only medical professionals should be entrusted with such a responsibility. On Nov. 14, a Sacramento County judge ruled in the nurses' favor.
It's hard not to see it as little more than a ploy to protect nursing jobs… If teachers and counselors were allowed to manage diabetic children, it might be a license for public education to further deplete the ranks of school nurses.
Jeffrey Ehrlich [A parent, states]… “the idea that nurses are the only ones that can help diabetic kids manage their health is ridiculous…It's not rocket science." (Emphasis added).
Dr. Francine Kaufman... “Nurses are preferable… but not allowing a vice principal or teacher to pinch hit is holding diabetic children back and imperiling their health… We have taught completely illiterate people how to technically deliver insulin …. It takes about four hours to train an adult.”
Lopez, S. (November 23, 2008). Young diabetics at heart of school nurse dispute in Los Angeles Times.
I am curious about your opinions on this one. Here we are in 2008 still trying to prove our value. Anyone know of any recent studies that demonstrate the value of having a school nurse?
Specializes in A little of this & a little of that.
I would agree that there should be people who are trained to help these children in an exceptional circumstance. It sounds as though TX may have a good program going. I just believe that nurses should be available in all schools at all times. Here it is required. If no other nurse sub can be found an agency nurse must be utilized. As a last resort LPN's are alowed to sub.
I think that in this era where more parents are exercising the right to have their child in the local public schools, we see more and more children with medical conditions in public schools. School districts must be held accountable to provide the nursing care needed for these kids to be safe while in school.
When I was growing up in the sixties, small schools usually "shared" a nurse. The nurse mainly oversaw student health records and did vaccines (well child was done in school where I lived). Sometime there might be Tylenol to give. Parents were called for most things even if the nurse was there. But, back then most mothers were at home and available. Children with disabilities didn't attend public schools. These days, parents are hardly ever availale right away and there are regular meds such as ADD meds and inhalers that kids get every day. Schol districts here have acknowledged this and every school must have a nurse in the building even private schools. Parochial schools are provided with nurses (and busing) by the town they are located in. School nurses have much more responsibility today and other personnel besides nurses don't have the background and training to do ongoing assessment. You can teach anyone to give an injection. You can't teach them nursing assessment and judgement skills.
I don't think parents should be expected to come to school to provide insulin for their kids. I think it's terrible that they are led to believe their only choice is to do that or to allow whoever the school wants to designate to do it. It is most unfortunate that they are so often unaware that they have an aboslute right to the support services their child requires. What they were trying to do in CA (and what the American Diabtetes Association seems to advocate) is allow non-nurses to provide this care as the primary plan, not "pinch-hitting" because of an unforeseeable circumstance where a nurse was not available.
To me the "pinch-hit" option is a good backup if there is an unforeseeable circumstance that prevents the nurse from being there when needed. Not hiring enough nurses doesn't fall into that category.
Thornbird
373 Posts
I would agree that there should be people who are trained to help these children in an exceptional circumstance. It sounds as though TX may have a good program going. I just believe that nurses should be available in all schools at all times. Here it is required. If no other nurse sub can be found an agency nurse must be utilized. As a last resort LPN's are alowed to sub.
I think that in this era where more parents are exercising the right to have their child in the local public schools, we see more and more children with medical conditions in public schools. School districts must be held accountable to provide the nursing care needed for these kids to be safe while in school.
When I was growing up in the sixties, small schools usually "shared" a nurse. The nurse mainly oversaw student health records and did vaccines (well child was done in school where I lived). Sometime there might be Tylenol to give. Parents were called for most things even if the nurse was there. But, back then most mothers were at home and available. Children with disabilities didn't attend public schools. These days, parents are hardly ever availale right away and there are regular meds such as ADD meds and inhalers that kids get every day. Schol districts here have acknowledged this and every school must have a nurse in the building even private schools. Parochial schools are provided with nurses (and busing) by the town they are located in. School nurses have much more responsibility today and other personnel besides nurses don't have the background and training to do ongoing assessment. You can teach anyone to give an injection. You can't teach them nursing assessment and judgement skills.
I don't think parents should be expected to come to school to provide insulin for their kids. I think it's terrible that they are led to believe their only choice is to do that or to allow whoever the school wants to designate to do it. It is most unfortunate that they are so often unaware that they have an aboslute right to the support services their child requires. What they were trying to do in CA (and what the American Diabtetes Association seems to advocate) is allow non-nurses to provide this care as the primary plan, not "pinch-hitting" because of an unforeseeable circumstance where a nurse was not available.
To me the "pinch-hit" option is a good backup if there is an unforeseeable circumstance that prevents the nurse from being there when needed. Not hiring enough nurses doesn't fall into that category.