Why is the general feel to this board that the Board of Nursing is 'out to get' us

4 hours ago, KalipsoRed21 said:

I think this is really a bigger topic. One I argue with my friends a lot when speaking of politics. The conversation always starts out about the police, an airline, the environment but basically boils down to safety vs. liberty/privacy. If there was a scale of 1-10 where safety is regarded the up most importance is rated a 1 and liberty/privacy is a 10; well my line of thought is somewhere around an 8. BON maybe protecting the public, but the law deals with criminals, not the BON. If a patient is hurt and the nurse is on something the family is allowed to take that nurse to court. Their should be better privacy with these programs. And there should be a due process, not just someone accused the person out of spite or hate and “just in case there is some truth to it we are going to screw with their income and livelihood”. To me that is asinine.

I couldn't agree more. A perfect picture of what can happen too.

When my friend was reported for silencing her MIA coworkers Fentanyl drip, she was put on 'paid administrative leave.' She was charged for the ER visit at her own hospital, charged for a re-evaluation, charged for all associated testing (5 total) and the reason they gave for hanging her was because she had IBS and had to poop frequently at work. That meant she was anxious.

Because IPN imposed her key restriction, that meant that she was 'guilty' in the hospital's eyes and they took back her paid administrative leave.

Is anybody getting this?

This could be you.

Then she had to walk back into this environment and somehow try to function. The hospital administrator walked into the meeting she was having with her supervisor and when she dared mention that he said she was on 'paid leave,' why wasn't she getting paid? He said he'd 'think' about it and did she understand that "if anything like this ever happened again, she was gone!" If what ever happened again?! Silencing a pump?

Not only will IPN allow this, they will take part in it. AND in the absence of any evidence of diversion, they'll encourage this sort of behavior from a reporter by punishing you for having diarrhea, but somehow trying to work during it. AND they'll punish you for calling in if you have diarrhea.

Horrible organization...

From an outsider's perspective, just my impression from reading the threads, it seems about 50/50. About half say the program saved their lives and the other half seem to say it's overkill.

1 hour ago, Oldmahubbard said:

From an outsider's perspective, just my impression from reading the threads, it seems about 50/50. About half say the program saved their lives and the other half seem to say it's overkill.

From an insiders perspective, I’d agree with that.

Looking back on my nightmarish experience with the (misdiagnoses, unnecessary and inappropriate, overpriced ‘treatment’, abuse, manipulation and lies and lack of ethics....(and that’s just the so-called ‘evaluation’ process) to attitudes and unprofessional behavior to the general lack of any clue as to how damaging this can be when improperly applied. If the reality of that were understood, perhaps people (me for one) would not be so angry about it all. This stuff is supposed to be an ‘alternative to discipline.” In many aspects, it is punishment. And overkill.

On 3/10/2019 at 9:33 PM, Persephone Paige said:

All I'm going to say is that I used to be where you are, Chad. I spent 10+ years without a license, got my shot to get back in and I was grateful for it. I have no problem with protecting the public. For the most part, I've seen success. But I have also seen extreme prejudice used against participants for no other reason then because they are participants. If the same tactics were used against a non-participant, they would not hold water. The only hope we have is to get out. And it is very possible to come in contact with a supervisor or a coworker that has an ax to grind with addicts/alcoholics, they can and will report you over and over again and NO ONE will protect you.

I agree

9 hours ago, Oldmahubbard said:

From an outsider's perspective, just my impression from reading the threads, it seems about 50/50. About half say the program saved their lives and the other half seem to say it's overkill.

And it could even be both. I am still grateful for the opportunity to work again. That would NOT have happened for me without the second chance from the FBON and the 4th chance from IPN. When I was intervened on, I was not ready to get clean. Finally, I decided to stop wasting their time and my money and wait until I was. I came back quite a few years later and they accepted me. But, I also told the FBON and IPN the truth when they asked why I was so non-compliant. I simply stated, "I didn't want to do it." If an addict doesn't want to do something, they aren't going to until they are ready.

What scares me, are the people out there who report us with no proof and IPN punishes because we are bound by a contract and they can. That is scary.

If something drastic doesn't change my mind, I'm going to quit my job and simply volunteer once my key restriction is lifted.

I too have been exceedingly fortunate in that I’ve been able weather the financial damage, though not completely unscathed. There was a bankruptcy back at the beginning. Added to the career damage, I’ve also had what I feel is the humiliation of my family supporting me for the bulk of the last 5 years. They shelled out a hunk of thier retirement to that nasty excuse for “treatment.” Those people were more interested in filling beds and making the bucks, than actually doing anything. That was the start and it pretty much went downhill from there, if that’s even possible (trust me, it is).

My heart aches for the otherwise competent and caring nurses driven away because of the financial aspects, even if this experience is truly what they need to get/stay clean. I don’t pretend to know what makes the person with the disease of addiction tick. What does confuse me is that these programs supposedly subscribe to the currently accepted ‘disease process’ of addiction yet persist in punishing their own who suffer with this disease (and lots of others who don’t). We can debate the ‘protecting the public ‘ till the cows come home, but my angle is that if these programs were really interested in that (I’m not talking the BON, separate subject) they would not be so intent on punishing all comers on a ‘just in case’ basis.

I fear, and I think rightfully so, that the corruption imbued in the recovery business as a whole has infiltrated many of these programs. Frankly I think having the words recovery and business in the same sentence is an oxymoron of the highest degree. What I think I do grasp, is that recovery cannot be beaten into someone. If a person is ready, they’ll know. That decision cannot be made for them, no matter how much any program thinks they can. As for folks like me for whom my ‘sin’ was to have a different illness, trying to beat a ‘cure’, maintenance or otherwise into me for a disease that I do not have is tantamount to malpractice.

Sadly, should I encounter a medical professional in need of assistance, I cannot in good conscience refer them to such a program. If my experience is any example, for many, these programs do nothing but add to the already horrible stigma of mental health conditions, addiction or otherwise.

My 3 cents (because 2 cents just wasn’t enough) for the morning.

I was quite surprised to learn that the required urine screens are not covered by insurance, and that they are so frequent.

If this is truly a disease, wouldn't necessary lab work be covered?

My hat is truly off to people who get through the program, keep their license and their sanity.

An RN acquaintance was not so lucky. She was asked to resign after being apparently impaired at work. Six weeks later, she was found dead at home.

3 hours ago, Oldmahubbard said:

I was quite surprised to learn that the required urine screens are not covered by insurance, and that they are so frequent.

If this is truly a disease, wouldn't necessary lab work be covered?

My hat is truly off to people who get through the program, keep their license and their sanity.

An RN acquaintance was not so lucky. She was asked to resign after being apparently impaired at work. Six weeks later, she was found dead at home.

I have found on my programs site some sort of document that is supposedly able to be submitted to one’s insurance. There’s a couple of problems with that.

1. There’s a generic CPT code but no name of the ordering physician, or diagnosis/reason for ordering the test. Perfectly good reason to reject the claim.

2. If your insurance is an HMO and does not pay for you to go to LabCorp, another perfectly good reason to reject the claim.

3. If by some miracle, you are able to get the insurance to pay something, it will be a pittance compared to the cash we have to pony up in advance. Has anyone looked at what the actual reimbursement rates are for lab work. It ain’t much.

4. Affinity and the like are for-profit entities. There is zero incentive to make this less expensive.

My thoughts are, "If you make drugs screens the way to prove I'm clean, why aren't they proof when someone is accused of using?"

My friend was clean of everything and they reinstated her narcs restriction. That's odd. It's more than odd, it's a scam. I had a positive for alcohol and it was easier to fight a piece of paper with the dreaded word 'positive' on it, then fight an accusation with 5 negative results to refute it. Something is wrong with this.

10 hours ago, Persephone Paige said:

My thoughts are, "If you make drugs screens the way to prove I'm clean, why aren't they proof when someone is accused of using?"

My friend was clean of everything and they reinstated her narcs restriction. That's odd. It's more than odd, it's a scam. I had a positive for alcohol and it was easier to fight a piece of paper with the dreaded word 'positive' on it, then fight an accusation with 5 negative results to refute it. Something is wrong with this.

Absolutely! Also if the screens are clean, should that not be enough? It proves non use.

In practice when a lab result is questionable in the absence of symptoms to explain it, the test is rerun or further testing is conducted. In this, any result other than negative (too dilute, too concentrated, etc.) is proof of using. Even the developers of these tests state that a result should not be used to punish in the absence of supporting evidence (or something to that effect)

No where in my program in 5 years have I EVER observed them to admit to being wrong or making an error. No matter what happens, it is our fault and we will pay for it. Monetary or otherwise. As folks on this board have said, convicted felons are treated better than this.

On 3/14/2019 at 11:42 AM, Oldmahubbard said:

From an outsider's perspective, just my impression from reading the threads, it seems about 50/50. About half say the program saved their lives and the other half seem to say it's overkill.

I agree with that. Now why isn’t everyone appalled by it? If you had to get on an airplane and there was a 50/50 chance you would get to your destination safely, would you get on it? If you were accused of murder and there was a 50/50 chance of being convicted based on circumstantial evidence; how would you feel about that? None of those seem acceptable to me. 50% isn’t good enough to pass nursing school then it sure as **** shouldn’t be high enough percent to take away my license.