I can not believe I am going to write this, but here goes: In the recent case where a man was visiting his wife who had just given birth in the hospital and he then suffered a diabetic seizure, prompting the staff of the hospital to give him some minimal form of treatment then phone 911, I agree with the hospital. Let me break it down a little more clearly. A man had an emergency medical problem that the nearby people were unable to deal with; paramedics were summoned to treat the man and transport him to an emergency center. The fact that the nearby people were nurses is irrelevant. The fact that he was transported three floors is irrelevant. (Obviously not to his bill; The couple shouldn't have been charged and I'm pleased it was waived, but that's not the point.) I genuinely appreciate, no, I LOVE when ambiguous situations are responded to with meticulous adherence to the guidelines. It makes me warm and fuzzy inside.
Nurses have specific roles and skill sets that are different from doctor's specific roles and skill sets which are different, in turn, from paramedic's specific roles and skill sets. Each are valuable and critical pieces of the whole health care pie. It may not make the wait-times shorter but I guarantee that if we start crossing expectations of people and forcing them to changing their jobs in "special cases", it will sabotage any further progress we hope to achieve. We need to accommodate for the precise expectations of each sector in the well-oiled Deus ex Medica, in order to keep something this large and unwieldy in efficient order. Sometimes when special cases are highlighted, it can vilify the system of due process that is required for anything more than a few people deciding where to go for supper because seriously guys, we went to Boston Pizza last week, but I really feel like Chinese, but there is a reason we put these systems in place.
Why are you writing on something so comparatively trivial?
To be honest, Dear Reader, ever since I read the article on one of Nina Courtepatte's murderers (a. Trigger warning and b. It breaks my heart that a 13 year old has "murderers") outlining how Alberta's highest court upheld the girl's sentencing as a minor, I have been downtrodden. The girl stuck a knife in Nina's neck, and then held her down to allow the other murderers to sexually assault her. The court feels that since she didn't plan beforehand, and did not do anything worse (Anything worse?! The mind reels.) afterward, means that the girl can serve 4 years in a facility, followed by 3 years in community "under supervision", i.e: 4 years in juvenile then a babysitter for a while. The only way I can console myself enough not to just run into the streets shrieking because obviously we have no justice in the world, is to repeat to myself that the girl is doomed to live as a despicable human being, and that's a pretty ugly sentence. Cold comfort in the winter of my discontent.
Nurses have specific roles and skill sets that are different from doctor's specific roles and skill sets which are different, in turn, from paramedic's specific roles and skill sets. Each are valuable and critical pieces of the whole health care pie. It may not make the wait-times shorter but I guarantee that if we start crossing expectations of people and forcing them to changing their jobs in "special cases", it will sabotage any further progress we hope to achieve. We need to accommodate for the precise expectations of each sector in the well-oiled Deus ex Medica, in order to keep something this large and unwieldy in efficient order. Sometimes when special cases are highlighted, it can vilify the system of due process that is required for anything more than a few people deciding where to go for supper because seriously guys, we went to Boston Pizza last week, but I really feel like Chinese, but there is a reason we put these systems in place.
Why are you writing on something so comparatively trivial?
To be honest, Dear Reader, ever since I read the article on one of Nina Courtepatte's murderers (a. Trigger warning and b. It breaks my heart that a 13 year old has "murderers") outlining how Alberta's highest court upheld the girl's sentencing as a minor, I have been downtrodden. The girl stuck a knife in Nina's neck, and then held her down to allow the other murderers to sexually assault her. The court feels that since she didn't plan beforehand, and did not do anything worse (Anything worse?! The mind reels.) afterward, means that the girl can serve 4 years in a facility, followed by 3 years in community "under supervision", i.e: 4 years in juvenile then a babysitter for a while. The only way I can console myself enough not to just run into the streets shrieking because obviously we have no justice in the world, is to repeat to myself that the girl is doomed to live as a despicable human being, and that's a pretty ugly sentence. Cold comfort in the winter of my discontent.
No comments:
Post a Comment