![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Mostly this is a re-post of my LJ entry from today. I have been missing and negligent to my journals for way too long. I miss reading everyone's posts and interacting with all of you wonderful, interesting people. My real world life has been so draining that dealing with Facebook (as a lot of workplace life gets semi-privately hashed about) has been all I could handle. But, no more! Hey, a post! An attempt at communication with people who's only interest in me is... well, me. I tell you, that is something I value, and I need to make sure I let everyone on the f-list know that, not to mention reciprocate.
So, I present a life update for those of you who still remember (and possibly care about!) me.
Work-wise, things have been kind of horrid, but not just for me...
Even writing about this in my personal journal can apparently get me into serious trouble, so if any of you folks are acquainted with both me and my workplace, I appreciate your respecting the privacy of what I share here with you all on my friendslist. I am already on the radar and under disciplinary measures from my apparent bad behaviour during a presentation of this program, and I kind of need to keep my job.
So, why take the chance and write about it here? Because I do not want to disparage the program or call it bad health care, because in some ways the program does make sense and has some merits, and I don't ever stoop to slander. But I want to share my misgivings and see what you folks think about the measures that are being undertaken (soon province-wide).
In a nutshell, the program states it is meant to enable all health care workers to work to their full scope of practice. The Right Person for the Right Job at the Right Time. As a nurse, I can get on board with this goal: an inordinate amount of my time each shift is spent doing things that should be done by other departments. For example, the lab where I work has hours where they will not do venous blood collections, will not correct their own errors (ie: if it turns out they did not draw enough blood for a test, they will void the test and require the order to be re-entered in our computer system in order for them to re-draw the sample. The manager of the lab actually sent an email out listing all the things the lab would not do, and the times they would do only a select few things. Basically, it is equivalent to nurses saying that after 4PM we will not give intravenous medications, change dirty diapers or answer callbells. Or that if you want your bed linen changed on a weekend, we will only do it at 11AM, and if the bed gets soiled after that time, well, the patient and family will have to live with the mess or change it themselves.
Nursing was the first discipline examined (of course it is only coincidental that nursing is the largest expense to a hospital budget). It was determined that in order to help nurses 'do what they were trained to do' that other levels of patient care providers would be added to units to help us do just that. In some areas that meant the hiring of LPNs. In others, CTAs (Care Team Assistants, fairly equivalent to PCWs). One area so far has added both to their area. My unit leadership determined, after a very long, intrusive and sometimes insulting review process (engineers followed nurses around and timed everything they did for an entire shift, including breaks and trips to the bathroom) that we were going to get CTAs. These workers would have direct patient contact and relieve the nurses of such tasks as bathing patients, doing vital signs, toileting care, 'running and fetching' things, and so forth. In some ways this would be a blessing, except for two things:
One, these workers are unlicensed and unregulated care providers. They have no governing body that proscribes an established philosophy of care, code of ethics or standards of performance. A 10 month community college program is the only training they get, with no hands-on experiences anywhere until they graduate. What this means to nurses is that if a CTA does something within their scope of ability and it goes wrong, placement of liability is sketchy, because there is no official body to report the issue to nor minimum professional level of standards of care to which to hold the incident against. Despite several Powers that Be assuring us that liability would not fall back onto the assigned RN, our own professional institutions are not in agreement.
Two, according to the proponents of the program and its developers, the MoC is not about money or meant to eliminate nursing jobs by hiring less skilled, less expensive care providers, but to help RNs work to their scope of practice. The reality so far is that nursing jobs have been lost, all postings for nursing positions are temporary assignments, and more positions will be eliminated through attrition. So, when that highly skilled senior nurse finally retires, no nurse will be hired to take her position (or at least not on a permanent basis).
What, me, paranoid? ::whistles and eyes disciplinary letter:: Everyone at work is scared, not just about the possibility of losing their jobs but of the incredible risk to patient safety and quality of care. Personally, I think money could be saved and all this fear and agita avoided if everyone simply worked to their scope of practice: if others did their jobs, then I could do mine.
After some challenging and official channel-usage, I was happily, if not easily, re-instated to a clinic position I'd held until last January for a few more months. Management felt that denying they violated the collective agreement in regards to this Local Union VP's failure to win said position after a) it being offered back to her then taken away again and b)not doing well in an interview for the position when interviewing was not required - per the CA - during open competition - was not a good move. My grievance almost made it to the arbitration level until the department director reversed the 'No, we didn't fuck it up' stance to 'Yeah, maybe an error was made...' thus avoiding all the lawyers and court visits.
Life. Still heavy on the family drama and light on workable solutions to said drama. I spend what non-working time I have stuck in a perpetual cleaning extravaganza of the flat and tending to the dogs. The cats pretty much take care of themselves, provided they have food, water and clean kitty pans. I miss snuggling with them at night, but they avoid the dogs at all costs. They find the dogs noisy and irritating :)
And now for the fun 30 day TV meme I have seen popping up on many friends' journals. Yay memes!
Day One - A show that should never have been canceled:
There are many shows I miss not having new episodes of to watch but were ready to be put to bed (The X-Files, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Gilmore Girls, Homicide: Life on the Street) and even more shows that ended wrongly - thematically, creatively and due to production/network foolery (Angel the Series, Due South, Tour of Duty) and deserved to play out to more fit endings.
Of them all (and the others I didn't bother listing) I think Due South is the show most in need of still being on the air. Equal parts corn, cheese and earnestness, Due South gave us stories and characters that were more about living life as a decent human being than it was a buddy cop show dramady. Relationships were more important than the circumstances the characters needed to correct. Value systems beat out material goods as things required to live a fulfilled life. Family and friends mattered, not winning lottery tickets or moments of dented pride. There is nothing on TV today that upholds these themes and beliefs, and I am including those with liberal, non-sectarian and/or theological story drivers. Benton Fraser's biggest obstacle in life was not adapting to urban life, living up to his father's legacy and ideals or his Kantian/Utilitarian fusion of ethics: it was himself. His weakness wasn't naivete, charming personality flaws or his distracting attractiveness, but love. When Fraser loved Victoria, he opened himself to pain, to failure and loss of his identity and ideals. His love for Vecchio almost got Vecchio, Kowalski and himself killed (not only in the finale but in 'Burning Down the House') from the sheer joy of seeing Vecchio or the confusion with Vecchio's absence. With Vecchio, his vulnerabilities were exposed when his honour and morality were challenged (just about every episode with Zuko illustrates this well). Kowalski was a walking advertisement for confusion and rawness, with his challenge being to find himself while pretending to be someone else. No falls from glory came due to substance abuse, theivery or moral ambiguity: these characters were most at risk of losing themselves when what they held dear (family, friends, values, ethics) was being threatened. This type of honesty about oneself and those around them is something missing on TV today, and is direly needed to be injected back into contemporary culture.
Whew. Long post. Kisses and cookies to all who've braved reading it (and chocolate sprinkles to those who actually post a response!)
Day 01 – A show that should never have been canceled
Day 02 - A show that you wish more people were watching
Day 03 - Your favorite new show (aired this TV season)
Day 04 - Your favorite show ever
Day 05 - A show you hate
Day 06 - Favorite episode of your favorite TV show
Day 07 - Least favorite episode of your favorite TV show
Day 08 - A show everyone should watch
Day 09 - Best scene ever
Day 10 - A show you thought you wouldn't like but ended up loving
Day 11 - A show that disappointed you
Day 12 - An episode you've watched more than 5 times
Day 13 - Favorite childhood show
Day 14 - Favorite male character
Day 15 - Favorite female character
Day 16 - Your guilty pleasure show
Day 17 - Favorite mini series
Day 18 - Favorite title sequence
Day 19 - Best TV show cast
Day 20 - Favorite kiss
Day 21 - Favorite ship
Day 22 - Favorite series finale
Day 23 - Most annoying character
Day 24 - Best quote
Day 25 - A show you plan on watching (old or new)
Day 26 - OMG WTF? Season finale
Day 27 - Best pilot episode
Day 28 - First TV show obsession
Day 29 - Current TV show obsession
Day 30 - Saddest character death
So, I present a life update for those of you who still remember (and possibly care about!) me.
Work-wise, things have been kind of horrid, but not just for me...
Even writing about this in my personal journal can apparently get me into serious trouble, so if any of you folks are acquainted with both me and my workplace, I appreciate your respecting the privacy of what I share here with you all on my friendslist. I am already on the radar and under disciplinary measures from my apparent bad behaviour during a presentation of this program, and I kind of need to keep my job.
So, why take the chance and write about it here? Because I do not want to disparage the program or call it bad health care, because in some ways the program does make sense and has some merits, and I don't ever stoop to slander. But I want to share my misgivings and see what you folks think about the measures that are being undertaken (soon province-wide).
In a nutshell, the program states it is meant to enable all health care workers to work to their full scope of practice. The Right Person for the Right Job at the Right Time. As a nurse, I can get on board with this goal: an inordinate amount of my time each shift is spent doing things that should be done by other departments. For example, the lab where I work has hours where they will not do venous blood collections, will not correct their own errors (ie: if it turns out they did not draw enough blood for a test, they will void the test and require the order to be re-entered in our computer system in order for them to re-draw the sample. The manager of the lab actually sent an email out listing all the things the lab would not do, and the times they would do only a select few things. Basically, it is equivalent to nurses saying that after 4PM we will not give intravenous medications, change dirty diapers or answer callbells. Or that if you want your bed linen changed on a weekend, we will only do it at 11AM, and if the bed gets soiled after that time, well, the patient and family will have to live with the mess or change it themselves.
Nursing was the first discipline examined (of course it is only coincidental that nursing is the largest expense to a hospital budget). It was determined that in order to help nurses 'do what they were trained to do' that other levels of patient care providers would be added to units to help us do just that. In some areas that meant the hiring of LPNs. In others, CTAs (Care Team Assistants, fairly equivalent to PCWs). One area so far has added both to their area. My unit leadership determined, after a very long, intrusive and sometimes insulting review process (engineers followed nurses around and timed everything they did for an entire shift, including breaks and trips to the bathroom) that we were going to get CTAs. These workers would have direct patient contact and relieve the nurses of such tasks as bathing patients, doing vital signs, toileting care, 'running and fetching' things, and so forth. In some ways this would be a blessing, except for two things:
One, these workers are unlicensed and unregulated care providers. They have no governing body that proscribes an established philosophy of care, code of ethics or standards of performance. A 10 month community college program is the only training they get, with no hands-on experiences anywhere until they graduate. What this means to nurses is that if a CTA does something within their scope of ability and it goes wrong, placement of liability is sketchy, because there is no official body to report the issue to nor minimum professional level of standards of care to which to hold the incident against. Despite several Powers that Be assuring us that liability would not fall back onto the assigned RN, our own professional institutions are not in agreement.
Two, according to the proponents of the program and its developers, the MoC is not about money or meant to eliminate nursing jobs by hiring less skilled, less expensive care providers, but to help RNs work to their scope of practice. The reality so far is that nursing jobs have been lost, all postings for nursing positions are temporary assignments, and more positions will be eliminated through attrition. So, when that highly skilled senior nurse finally retires, no nurse will be hired to take her position (or at least not on a permanent basis).
What, me, paranoid? ::whistles and eyes disciplinary letter:: Everyone at work is scared, not just about the possibility of losing their jobs but of the incredible risk to patient safety and quality of care. Personally, I think money could be saved and all this fear and agita avoided if everyone simply worked to their scope of practice: if others did their jobs, then I could do mine.
After some challenging and official channel-usage, I was happily, if not easily, re-instated to a clinic position I'd held until last January for a few more months. Management felt that denying they violated the collective agreement in regards to this Local Union VP's failure to win said position after a) it being offered back to her then taken away again and b)not doing well in an interview for the position when interviewing was not required - per the CA - during open competition - was not a good move. My grievance almost made it to the arbitration level until the department director reversed the 'No, we didn't fuck it up' stance to 'Yeah, maybe an error was made...' thus avoiding all the lawyers and court visits.
Life. Still heavy on the family drama and light on workable solutions to said drama. I spend what non-working time I have stuck in a perpetual cleaning extravaganza of the flat and tending to the dogs. The cats pretty much take care of themselves, provided they have food, water and clean kitty pans. I miss snuggling with them at night, but they avoid the dogs at all costs. They find the dogs noisy and irritating :)
And now for the fun 30 day TV meme I have seen popping up on many friends' journals. Yay memes!
Day One - A show that should never have been canceled:
There are many shows I miss not having new episodes of to watch but were ready to be put to bed (The X-Files, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Gilmore Girls, Homicide: Life on the Street) and even more shows that ended wrongly - thematically, creatively and due to production/network foolery (Angel the Series, Due South, Tour of Duty) and deserved to play out to more fit endings.
Of them all (and the others I didn't bother listing) I think Due South is the show most in need of still being on the air. Equal parts corn, cheese and earnestness, Due South gave us stories and characters that were more about living life as a decent human being than it was a buddy cop show dramady. Relationships were more important than the circumstances the characters needed to correct. Value systems beat out material goods as things required to live a fulfilled life. Family and friends mattered, not winning lottery tickets or moments of dented pride. There is nothing on TV today that upholds these themes and beliefs, and I am including those with liberal, non-sectarian and/or theological story drivers. Benton Fraser's biggest obstacle in life was not adapting to urban life, living up to his father's legacy and ideals or his Kantian/Utilitarian fusion of ethics: it was himself. His weakness wasn't naivete, charming personality flaws or his distracting attractiveness, but love. When Fraser loved Victoria, he opened himself to pain, to failure and loss of his identity and ideals. His love for Vecchio almost got Vecchio, Kowalski and himself killed (not only in the finale but in 'Burning Down the House') from the sheer joy of seeing Vecchio or the confusion with Vecchio's absence. With Vecchio, his vulnerabilities were exposed when his honour and morality were challenged (just about every episode with Zuko illustrates this well). Kowalski was a walking advertisement for confusion and rawness, with his challenge being to find himself while pretending to be someone else. No falls from glory came due to substance abuse, theivery or moral ambiguity: these characters were most at risk of losing themselves when what they held dear (family, friends, values, ethics) was being threatened. This type of honesty about oneself and those around them is something missing on TV today, and is direly needed to be injected back into contemporary culture.
Whew. Long post. Kisses and cookies to all who've braved reading it (and chocolate sprinkles to those who actually post a response!)
Day 01 – A show that should never have been canceled
Day 02 - A show that you wish more people were watching
Day 03 - Your favorite new show (aired this TV season)
Day 04 - Your favorite show ever
Day 05 - A show you hate
Day 06 - Favorite episode of your favorite TV show
Day 07 - Least favorite episode of your favorite TV show
Day 08 - A show everyone should watch
Day 09 - Best scene ever
Day 10 - A show you thought you wouldn't like but ended up loving
Day 11 - A show that disappointed you
Day 12 - An episode you've watched more than 5 times
Day 13 - Favorite childhood show
Day 14 - Favorite male character
Day 15 - Favorite female character
Day 16 - Your guilty pleasure show
Day 17 - Favorite mini series
Day 18 - Favorite title sequence
Day 19 - Best TV show cast
Day 20 - Favorite kiss
Day 21 - Favorite ship
Day 22 - Favorite series finale
Day 23 - Most annoying character
Day 24 - Best quote
Day 25 - A show you plan on watching (old or new)
Day 26 - OMG WTF? Season finale
Day 27 - Best pilot episode
Day 28 - First TV show obsession
Day 29 - Current TV show obsession
Day 30 - Saddest character death
