NurseWeek
readers from across the country share their thoughts on
articles that inspired them and issues that moved them.
E-mail
us at editor@nurseweek.com.
Please use the name of the article you are responding to
as the subject of your e-mail. Unless otherwise noted, all
letters may be edited and published.
Please
include your full name, hometown and state, and healthcare
credentials. Brief and articulate messages are more likely
to be published.
November
27, 2000
False
assumptions
Having
read your publication for the first time, I felt compelled
to write while still shaking my head at the letters you
received from some Midwestern nurses regarding the political
positions taken in your September/October issue. I regret
not having the issue to which the writers refer, but it
is the steam coming off the letters that I wish to address.
Of
the four printed letters with political overtones, three
were written by strident Republicans and all were narrowly,
personally focused.
Two
of the writers had personal problems with the ANA. I don’t
understand this at all since the ANA is a very weak lobbying
group. Simply compare the successes of the insurance and
pharmaceutical industries staving off legislation to anything
at all the ANA has accomplished on Capitol Hill. Drug companies
and HMOs are batting a thousand, while the ANA is hitless.
Collectively,
the writers are, as Ms. Zimmerman put it, "operating
on feelings" ("We
the people," Readers Respond, online, Nov. 6).
Individually, most of the writers operate with false assumptions.
Ms.
Zimmerman from Kansas believes "we are the government."
We are not. We only partly elect a government. One might
also ask Ms. Zimmerman if she can recall when an HMO was
ever "tender, loving and caring."
Ms.
Peterson from Nebraska raises the abortion issue, which
is an out-of-place specific when discussing a general remedy
for Americans’ health care malaise ("Disappointed,"
Readers Respond, online, Nov. 6). Her assumption that the
ANA is "far left" is simply silly from anyone
but a right-wing religious fundamentalist. For reference,
the Unabomber is far left.
Ms.
Kalbacken from Peoria assumes incorrectly that Al Gore "has
been in the White House the last eight years" ("Not
the solution," Readers Respond, online, Nov. 6).
Perhaps Chelsea noticed an extra, strange man at 1600 Pennsylvania
Ave., but I doubt it. Going so far as to imply that Al Gore
has been president for the last two terms is, again, silly.
All
three of these writers have one assumption correct and well
noted: Government, the way it now works in this country,
is no solution at all. Unfortunately, neither Mr. Bush nor
Mr. Gore will change anything about why government isn’t
a solution.
Remarkably,
Ms. Bradshaw, from Carbondale, Ill. ("Radical
idea," Readers Respond, online, Nov. 6), seems
to have gotten the first step in reforming this mess exactly
right – even if she is "operating on feelings."
Charles
Cogan, RN
Rochester, Ill.
Heads
up
I
would remind Mr. Berens that a headline summarizes the key
import of an article ("Damage
Control," Nov. 13). Nurses’ culpability (and by
inference, nurses practice poorly), obviously, in the eyes
of the public, was what Mr. Berens expected them to take
away from his article. All the positive statements and explanations
of the reality of our current health care environment are
easily lost when the reader attacks the article with the
intent to learn about "nurses who kill or injure thousands
of patients."
In
our speed-driven society, we are not investigative readers;
headlines give us "the whole story" in a nutshell.
I applaud Mr. Berens’ good intentions as he explained them
in the article; it’s a shame he chose to lead the public
to other "conclusions."
Terri
Goodman, Ph.D., RN
Dallas
Image
boost
I
received my issue of HealthWeek and was very disappointed
to read an article about nurses being portrayed in the wrong
light ("Image
Overhaul," Oct. 16). I am a registered respiratory
therapist and an important worker at my hospital, yet every
time that I watch "ER," the only time that "respiratory"
is mentioned is in a quick "call respiratory for a
vent." Well, I hate to inform you, but we do much more
than bring a vent to the doctor or nurse!
At
least the nurses portrayed in "ER" have names
and stories around them, and the American public already
knows what a nurse is and what they do for a living. Most
have no clue what a respiratory therapist is, yet our role
is just as important as any nurse’s role in the health care
profession.
Vicki
Ebert, RRT
Webster, Texas
Wake
up
I
have two children involved in nursing, a daughter, 32, who
is an RN studying to become a physician assistant and a
son, 25, who works in a nursing home and has LVN certification
through the Army.
We
are strongly pro-life; we respect life in all stages from
womb to tomb. But when I read the opinions of your people,
I become alarmed that nurses have fallen for the so called
"right to choose" which excludes pre-born and
the elderly.
I
am also going back to school to take a course in massage
therapy. We are studying anatomy in great depth. The course
is providing me with insight into how the body works and
its intricacy from the time of fertilization of the egg
by the sperm.
How
can you, a person in nursing, detach the reality of life
in all its stages from your mind? How can you justify any
opinion other than the sanctity of life in all its stages?
When
a pre-born has all the mechanisms in place at seven weeks
in utero, all his/her organs, a nervous system, digestive,
etc., and just needs a safe place to grow in the nine months
required to survive birth, how can you not marvel at the
wonderful person-to-be that each human being is who is created
in the "image and likeness" of God, the mastermind
behind all this intricacy?
I
am not accusing anyone of a lack of faith because reason
alone will tell us that there is something greater than
us mere humans here at work. Nothing written since the Roe
v. Wade decision 28 years ago has superseded or contravened
the Hippocratic oath that doctors have taken to uphold life
and do no harm to humans in all their stages of growth before
that horrendous decision to eliminate more than 37 million
babies in 28 years by legal abortion – never mind the enormous
amount of babies aborted through oral contraceptives.
Wake
up, nurses. Who will take care of you when you need home
health or nursing home care? You lament a lack of nurses.
Where are all the girl babies who would have stepped up
into the career of nursing, alleviating the so-called shortage?
And so on and so on, through the various litanies espoused
by various industries. Where can we get quality, educated
help to replace the sure-to-come dearth of working men and
women that never were allowed to be born? You sicken me
beyond words. Wake up, nurses, you too will be called expendable
if you refuse to protect the least of His creation.
And
regarding breast cancer caused by oral contraceptives. Where
have you been? The knowledge about the effect that oral
contraceptives have had on the female reproductive system – including
the breast – has been available for more than 20 years.
You
say you have not heard the questions many pro-life groups
have testified to concerning the large doses of estrogen
these pills have and their effect on women of all ages.
You
have an article sponsoring a breast cancer research benefit
to raise money to prevent what oral contraceptives are doing
to women ("Thousands run to raise money," News
Briefs, Oct. 16). Why do women take a pill that has such
horrendous side effects for them and now also kills the
baby they may not know is present in the womb? New contraceptives
are so low dose in estrogen that a baby can become implanted
and then forcefully evicted from the womb when progesterone
effectively destroys the developing embryo.
Then
you talk about the effects these pills have had on the unsuspecting
women ("Birth control pills linked to breast cancer,"
News Briefs, Oct. 16). Does the estrogen pass through the
placenta and affect the unborn boy or girl that is developing?
We know that estrogen stores in fatty tissue. How does this
affect developing gonads in the unborn baby, surfacing later
when these adults then have trouble becoming pregnant? Or
worse yet: the baby, now an adult, who does not know which
sex they are? Is anyone in the medical field listening or
do you really care for life in all its stages?
The
information has been available through the various right-to-life
organizations. You can’t use ignorance as an excuse.
Laura
Dylla
Adkins, Texas
