HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I'm a nurse and I've poss...

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 02:59 AM

I'm a nurse and I've possibly been exposed to Ebola and I think I maybe should be quarantined

I mean Common Sense tells me I might be a danger to others by spreading this deadly virus around.

However neither the health authorities nor my employers at the hospital I work at and where my possible exposure took place have said anything about me not doing my job while I "self-monitor" for Ebola symptoms. Since my job obviously involves dealing intimately with sick people some of whom will have compromised immune systems then clearly the experts are not at all worried about me being contagious.

Now a nurse's income isn't poverty level but it's not wealthy either and I have these non refundable tickets to fly to my family and fiancee several states away as I've moved for my job and been living in a new city apart from my family for some months now and I sure would like to not lose the money I put into the tickets and I'd really like to see my family and get some moral support after what I've been through lately. I haven't had time yet to make any friends here so if I don't use my tickets I'll spend my time off basically alone.

Hmm... Me still working with full approval of both the authorities and my employer indicates the experts aren't worried about me being contagious, I know what, I'll call the experts and see if it's OK to go ahead and fly and not lose the money I had spent on those tickets.



214 replies, 20211 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 214 replies Author Time Post
Reply I'm a nurse and I've possibly been exposed to Ebola and I think I maybe should be quarantined (Original post)
Fumesucker Oct 2014 OP
KMOD Oct 2014 #1
Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #2
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #3
Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #5
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #6
Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #7
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #9
Warren DeMontague Oct 2014 #10
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #12
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #44
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #45
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #47
magical thyme Oct 2014 #55
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #59
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #117
calimary Oct 2014 #148
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #153
calimary Oct 2014 #171
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #180
calimary Oct 2014 #191
jwirr Oct 2014 #160
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #168
suffragette Oct 2014 #126
Proud Liberal Dem Oct 2014 #107
magical thyme Oct 2014 #161
Ms. Toad Oct 2014 #138
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #145
Ms. Toad Oct 2014 #166
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #169
Ms. Toad Oct 2014 #173
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #179
Ms. Toad Oct 2014 #186
riderinthestorm Oct 2014 #210
riderinthestorm Oct 2014 #208
Ms. Toad Oct 2014 #211
riderinthestorm Oct 2014 #212
Ms. Toad Oct 2014 #214
IdaBriggs Oct 2014 #46
Crunchy Frog Oct 2014 #57
MH1 Oct 2014 #87
Mojorabbit Oct 2014 #167
GeorgeGist Oct 2014 #205
Dorian Gray Oct 2014 #50
ann--- Oct 2014 #76
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #86
kath Oct 2014 #96
dumbcat Oct 2014 #97
Gormy Cuss Oct 2014 #99
laundry_queen Oct 2014 #116
Comrade Grumpy Oct 2014 #140
Gormy Cuss Oct 2014 #182
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #100
pipoman Oct 2014 #4
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #8
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #119
pansypoo53219 Oct 2014 #11
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #13
renate Oct 2014 #14
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #17
ArcticFox Oct 2014 #111
LostInAnomie Oct 2014 #15
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #16
LostInAnomie Oct 2014 #18
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #19
woodsprite Oct 2014 #88
ArcticFox Oct 2014 #118
treestar Oct 2014 #95
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #121
treestar Oct 2014 #196
elias7 Oct 2014 #139
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #142
Live and Learn Oct 2014 #20
Yo_Mama Oct 2014 #67
Crunchy Frog Oct 2014 #72
Evergreen Emerald Oct 2014 #130
moriah Oct 2014 #202
mnhtnbb Oct 2014 #21
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #22
mnhtnbb Oct 2014 #31
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #33
mnhtnbb Oct 2014 #49
Bluenorthwest Oct 2014 #51
mnhtnbb Oct 2014 #54
ArcticFox Oct 2014 #131
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #53
mnhtnbb Oct 2014 #58
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #60
mnhtnbb Oct 2014 #90
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #112
mnhtnbb Oct 2014 #146
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #155
ArcticFox Oct 2014 #133
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #123
vanlassie Oct 2014 #74
mnhtnbb Oct 2014 #84
vanlassie Oct 2014 #89
mnhtnbb Oct 2014 #91
vanlassie Oct 2014 #94
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #124
lunasun Oct 2014 #172
vanlassie Oct 2014 #177
TBF Oct 2014 #68
sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #175
ReRe Oct 2014 #23
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #25
ReRe Oct 2014 #41
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #24
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #26
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #29
WinkyDink Oct 2014 #36
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #42
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #127
SoCalDem Oct 2014 #134
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #137
Shrike47 Oct 2014 #27
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #28
SoCalDem Oct 2014 #149
Tumbulu Oct 2014 #207
lalabetsy Oct 2014 #30
WinkyDink Oct 2014 #32
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #34
WinkyDink Oct 2014 #35
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #39
elias7 Oct 2014 #144
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #152
uppityperson Oct 2014 #176
Yo_Mama Oct 2014 #81
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #125
LisaL Oct 2014 #143
Chemisse Oct 2014 #163
mgardener54 Oct 2014 #37
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #40
newfie11 Oct 2014 #38
Yo_Mama Oct 2014 #77
newfie11 Oct 2014 #197
still_one Oct 2014 #43
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #48
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #128
Yo_Mama Oct 2014 #66
Lars39 Oct 2014 #52
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #56
Downwinder Oct 2014 #65
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #69
Downwinder Oct 2014 #73
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #79
Downwinder Oct 2014 #82
Warren Stupidity Oct 2014 #204
DeadLetterOffice Oct 2014 #78
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #129
Lars39 Oct 2014 #85
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #115
Lars39 Oct 2014 #181
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #183
Lars39 Oct 2014 #184
HereSince1628 Oct 2014 #61
ann--- Oct 2014 #83
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #98
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #102
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #105
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #106
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #114
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #132
HereSince1628 Oct 2014 #108
Turbineguy Oct 2014 #62
ileus Oct 2014 #63
Yo_Mama Oct 2014 #64
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #71
Yo_Mama Oct 2014 #80
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #109
TBF Oct 2014 #70
ann--- Oct 2014 #75
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #103
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #110
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #113
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #120
Downwinder Oct 2014 #198
ann--- Oct 2014 #147
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #136
MH1 Oct 2014 #92
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #93
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #104
TheKentuckian Oct 2014 #135
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #141
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #150
TheKentuckian Oct 2014 #162
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #174
TheKentuckian Oct 2014 #190
TeeYiYi Oct 2014 #101
KMOD Oct 2014 #122
pitohui Oct 2014 #151
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #154
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #158
KingCharlemagne Oct 2014 #156
jwirr Oct 2014 #157
GeorgeGist Oct 2014 #206
jwirr Oct 2014 #213
Sweet Freedom Oct 2014 #159
Fumesucker Oct 2014 #164
Sweet Freedom Oct 2014 #199
Lars39 Oct 2014 #185
Chemisse Oct 2014 #165
uppityperson Oct 2014 #178
LisaL Oct 2014 #187
uppityperson Oct 2014 #189
Chemisse Oct 2014 #194
LisaL Oct 2014 #188
Chemisse Oct 2014 #195
LisaL Oct 2014 #209
lunasun Oct 2014 #170
donco Oct 2014 #192
MoonRiver Oct 2014 #193
Avalux Oct 2014 #200
IronLionZion Oct 2014 #201
FloridaBlues Oct 2014 #203

Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:07 AM

1. This is a brilliant post.

 

looking forward to the responses.

And yes, I would like to think that I would not have exposed others. But, I'm not in their shoes, and I didn't just deal with an Ebola situation for myself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:17 AM

2. I don't blame the nurse for flying. If she can be blamed for anything it is for putting trust in the

"authorities" who haven't seemed to have a real good handle on what they're doing with this.

The same people who presumably sent her in to deal with a level 4 pathogen wearing maybe a mask and some gloves, and quite possibly gave her a death sentence in the process.

No, I don't blame her. I blame the employer and the authorities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #2)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:19 AM

3. Who ~do~ we listen to then?

Now we have a lawyer as Ebola Czar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #3)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:23 AM

5. I thoroughly enjoyed Kevin Spacey's performance as him in "Recount"





But beyond that, no, I don't know. What I said in the other thread will hold, I'll see what the guy actually does before weighing in.

Honestly, Freiden's an MD and every time he opens his mouth it's a disaster. He doesn't exactly inspire confidence. I suspect at least half the purpose of putting Klain in is to have a different head to appear on the tv sets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #5)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:27 AM

6. How is he going to answer any questions except, I'll get back to you on that"?

Another example of management science, a good manager can manage anything, they don't need knowledge of the process they are managing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #6)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:31 AM

7. I strongly suspect you're right, but I am willing to wait and see.

That said, I thought it was an.... odd pick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #7)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:41 AM

9. What the interesting subtext of this little situation with the nurses is...

That risking the public by working as a nurse is fine but as soon as you do something for pleasure that puts the public at risk you are a horrible person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #9)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:46 AM

10. I suspect people want to feel like it is contained geographically, that's part of it.

Personally, I don't think it should have ever come in the country on a commercial flight in the first place. Maybe that is terrible of me, but that was the prime fuckup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #10)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:53 AM

12. There was *zero* complaint about them working, none, nada, zip, zilch

Not one freaking peep of complaint about Ebola exposed nurses working with immune compromised patients in ridiculously intimate fashion.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #12)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:21 AM

44. Texas Presbyterian acted completely irresponsibly.

The nurses who cared for Duncan probably should have been isolated for 21 days, JUST LIKE DUNCAN'S FAMILY. But the hospital's incompetence does not negate bad and extremely dangerous decisions on the part of Vinson and the lab supervisor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MoonRiver (Reply #44)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:44 AM

45. Never heard anything from the CDC or Texas health authorities either

No one in the upper echelons gave it the slightest thought until the flight brought public awareness.

That's what's truly scary, not one nurse who believed the authorities when they told her what she wanted to hear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #45)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:51 AM

47. The irresponsibility and incompetence demonstrated by literally everybody

during this nightmare is horrifying. Still, under the circumstances, I would not have flown. Hoping Amber has a full recovery and can get on with her life, but she will never be viewed as a hero, like Nina is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #45)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:35 AM

55. the good news is that the locals have figured it out for themselves

 

Article this morning describes Texas Presbyterian as a ghost town. Former ED wait time was 52 minutes. Now there is no wait. People canceling appointments with them and affiliated doctors in droves.

And on the news Thursday PM, Dr. Gupta said he wondered all day why they shipped the nurses out. He found out in the evening it was staffing issues. And said straight out that they are afraid of their nurses walking out. That's probably why they released the patient Baylor sent them. They won't attempt to treat any more Ebola patients because if they do, they're staff is walking.

Must be that invisible free market hand...

Hopefully hospitals around the country will sit up and take notice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #55)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:51 AM

59. I can just imagine the staff trying to get new positions..

So where was your previous employment?

Umm.. Texas Presbyterian

<click>


The executive fuckups on this are going to harm a great many lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #59)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:43 AM

117. From where I sit, unless there's a sea change, the people who actually did fuck up, i.e.,

 

the executives and policy makers, will not be held to account or suffer harm in the slightest.

Instead, as you note, it will be the ordinary workers who bear the brunt of caring for the ill and who then suffer the harms of dreadful management decisions and policies, up to and including sentences of death.

Um, what do I mean by 'sea change'? Democratic Socialist revolution.

If anyone needed any more evidence that capitalism is an utter and complete wreck and failure, surely this is it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #117)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:57 AM

148. The only "consolation" I suppose you could say - would be -

the executives and policy makers WILL be the ones hurt, when they see their hospital losing money. That's all they care about anyway. Whoever it was who told the nurse in the ER to just send the guy home and NOT isolate him ABSOLUTELY was on FULL "Penny-wise/Pound-EXTREMELY-foolish" mode. I'd bet whoever it was - thought only of how much more that might cost.

Here's what you have to keep in mind, as a filter, with these people, to understand the deep-down: Just imagine the mentality governing a private hospital (which is - a FOR-PROFIT hospital). The overriding concern, Number-One, Priority-One, would be governed by a single key question: "do you know how much that's gonna COST????"

The bottom line here is always the bottom line. Costs. A private hospital is ALWAYS going to be MOST concerned about profit. MORE profit, LESS spending. CUTTING COSTS TO MAXIMIZE PROFITS. And when their profits start dropping - that will hit the folks in the executive suites - to some extent, anyway.

They're not gonna like the "buddy system" guidelines that are being imposed. That means staffing up. If one nurse was sufficient before, IT AIN'T THAT WAY NO MORE!!! And that's not for free. Tough shit. It's gonna COST, whether the damn bean counters like it or not. If Ebola treatment means those nurses are confined and may not be allowed to treat other patients, that means you have to find some more nurses somewhere and bring 'em in to take care of the other patients. You have to add staff to cover all the nurses and doctors who might now be under quarantine because they treated a gravely ill Ebola patient and were at dire risk of direct exposure - so they have to be taken out of action for at least 21 days. And that, too, means you have to hire more. That means adding on the expenses. And more supervision. And more supplies. More equipment. More specialty-protective garb. More safe disposal protocols and mechanisms and supplies and people to take care of that part of it. They're not gonna like that, either. Because that all means extra expenditures - extra COSTS. TOUGH SHIT. They're just gonna have to face it - it's just gonna COST, whether they like it or not. Which will cut into their profits. And that's how they'll be hurt. And in my opinion, that's just too damn bad. I wish there were a way to punish them individually for being myopic cheapskates. People will DIE because of it. One guy already did, as we know. Just so they can keep costs down.

Health services SHOULD NOT BE A FUCKING PROFIT CENTER, DAMMIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #148)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:05 PM

153. I think Texas Presbyterian is a non-profit hospital, part of a larger holding group that

 

may or may not be for-profit. That holding group's CEO made a coool $5.7 million in salary and bonuses in 2009 (the last year figures were available).

Funny, I haven't seen anyone here or in Congress blaming that PoS CEO for the dreadful policies and decisions. Instead, it's the latest round in 'let's blame the disempowered workers".

Whether Texas Presbyterian is for-profit or not-for-profit, though, strikes me as largely immaterial, given that it exists within a capitalist economy and system that views 'labor' as just another 'commodity' (or 'cost') to be exploited until used up and then discarded.

In such a capitalist system, everything was working exactly as planned. A feature, not a bug (npi), as the kids today say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #153)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:44 PM

171. And that's what has to change.

My main upset about that is - it's not going to change. Because you're correct - "given that it exists within a capitalist economy..." and as such, it isn't gonna change. Especially when you have certain large and potent segments of the media excoriating ANYTHING that might remotely resonate with "socialism"!!!!!!!!!!!!

No one in Congress is going to blame the PoS CEO. The same as with Wall Street. Except maybe for Elizabeth Warren. And that's just one voice. Money will be the strangulation of us all. Because the CEOs are funding the cranks who holler "SOCIALISM!!!!!" every time someone tries to come up with an idea that would benefit the greater good instead of the capitalists and other assorted vultures and vampires at the top of the money pile.

Which is why, as much as I rail and rant here about it, it's not going to change. Too much of a change is what's needed, and there are too few people willing to do what's needed to change it. Besides, too many people don't even see a need for change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #171)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:58 PM

180. No one - Marx and Lenin included - ever said the transition to socialism

 

would be direct and without reversals and counter-revolutionary victories. (See the People's Republic of China and the former USSR for examples.)

I do agree that it's unlikely America will transition to socialism within our lifetimes. I do think the power to redbait Socialists and socialism has diminished somewhat, as evidence by Sanders' and Warren's popularity in the polls. (Neither one is, properly speaking, a 'Socialist' but even so they'd be targets of red-baiting were the red-baiters to start foaming at the mouth.)

I can forsee -- maybe not in my lifetime -- a candidate or party running on a platform or proposal to make all healthcare workers government employees, and all healthcare facilities government property, to be paid for out of general (tax) revenues and answerable not to shareholders but to the democratic process. That may seem like a pipe dream right now, but the fact that I and you can envision it means it's not completely outside the realm of possibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #180)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:50 PM

191. Well, it's always better to try to remain optimistic.

We got pretty far in the late 60s and early 70s, before the Dems figured they could relax, ease up on the vigilance, start rolling over and going back to sleep. But the enemy never dosed off. The enemy never stopped working, never relaxed, never eased up, never assumed things were just gonna be okay because we'd at least come part of the way. No one on our side was as vigilant as they needed to be, when Prop 13 was starting to boil here in California in the late 70s, and triumphed at the polls in 1978, giving reagan an easily slip-n-slide straight into the White House in 1980, enjoying all the lavish momentum that had built up to hate government and taxes and take a meat-axe to taxes in the most reckless, short-sighted fashion imaginable.

I hope you're correct. I hope the way you see it is the way it'll happen. But I'm WAY troubled about it. I don't have the faith in the thinking of the voters that you may have. We have so much lost ground to make up, so far to go to catch up, and a whole national rehabilitation project to engineer and implement. We're only just getting started, and the bad guys have a 30+year head start.

We need to study, thoroughly ingest, and HIJACK - THIS:

http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/

And it'll probably take 30 years for us, too, to regain the upper hand. The bad guys are HELLBENT on overturning all of the New Deal, all the FDR-initiated and implemented programs that HELP PEOPLE. All the efforts launched by government to create jobs, complete public projects, provide a safety net to the elderly and the poor, and level the playing field a little. The bad guys don't want government intervention AT ALL. They want to leave it all to the Almighty free market. Which FAILED UTTERLY back in the days leading up to the FDR era, and why the New Deal was needed. The government HAD to step in because the private sector, the Almighty free market, was crippled. Was under water. Just wasn't happening. The government HAD to step in because the private sector had fucked things up so royally that it simply could NO LONGER respond. The PRIVATE SECTOR was the problem - that government had to step in and fix. And the GOP and free-marketeers don't want anybody stepping in on their orgy. And they don't see anything that needs fixing.

And that attitude has been allowed to sink in for so many years while the Dems slept, that it's going to take YEARS to reverse. Probably decades. I doubt I'll see what I hope to see in our country - in my lifetime. I'm 61 now. I suspect I'll run out of time long before the bad guys run out of opportunities or schemes to fuck things up. And long before most of America wakes up and realizes how badly it's getting screwed by these vultures and vampires.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #117)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:19 PM

160. I would assume that the hospital might face some law suits that could cost them a bit of money and

they could go broke. So far at least 3 people have ebola because it was mishandled by the administration. And it would not surprise me that there will be others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #160)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:37 PM

168. That's why it's vital for Texas to elect Abbott as Governor, so that those who were harmed

 

by management cannot sue for damages.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #45)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:07 AM

126. Public awareness. Yes,they seemed to care more about it as public reactions than public health issue

More of a business model approach.

And that is scary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MoonRiver (Reply #44)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:10 AM

107. And, ironically, the nurses are the only ones whom have contracted Ebola

Which, if that remains the case, the odds of other people contracting it through more casual contact would seem to be relatively low (and Mr. Duncan's family's contact was much less "casual" than those whom may have had contact with the nurse who flew). I'm frankly amazed that nobody in Mr. Duncan's family are showing signs. That may not remain the case but the nurses seem to have developed symptoms in a shorter amount of time than Mr. Duncan's family have not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #107)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:23 PM

161. the nurses were exposed right up to the bitter end, when the virus takes completely

 

without anything holding it back. Massive quantities of virus in probably microscopic droplets.

And at the NIH, not only do they buddy up for donning/doffing biohazard suits with respirators, but apparently nobody draws blood by themselves. Which makes sense. You are at high risk of a needlestick drawing blood, the moreso with a patient that may suddenly be writhing with pain, projectile vomiting, or cramping from diarrhea. There needs to be at least one person holding the patient still while drawing in such a circumstance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #12)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:34 AM

138. Link to an article

Published prior to Nurse Pham's diagnosis which confirms they were still working. (I have seen reports that while they were treating Duncan they worked with other patients - and outrage at that.)

I've looked - I can't even find any confirmation published anytime - even after the diagnosis of both women - that says they continued to work between exposure and being diagnosed. Which should tell you something about why there was no outrage. If someone is doing something boneheaded, and no one knows about it, no one is going to make a peep.

Aside from which, the biggest outrage is because (1) she was apparently symptomatic as early as Friday - before she took the first flight and (2) she was definitely symptomatic when she took the second flight and was traipsing around the bridal shop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #138)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:52 AM

145. Her superiors were unaware that she and all the others were still working?

That seems a little odd.

I hadn't heard the other info about when she was symptomatic.. Does that mean she had an elevated temperature under the CDC guideline?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #145)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:29 PM

166. I have not seen confirmation one way or the other

that she and the others were still working. You are complaining about there not being any public outrage - there wouldn't be any outrage if the public was not aware it was happening. If they were working, presumably their supervisors knew about it - but I have not seen any confirmation one way or another. The fact that nurse Pham refused to open her door to family and friends, and this comment, would suggest that they were not:

The Dallas hospital said that transferring Nina Pham "is the right decision (because) many of the medical professionals who would normally staff the intensive care unit (are) sidelined for continuous monitoring." Some 76 workers who cared for Duncan, like Vinson and Pham, have been asked to do things like regularly take their temperatures to gauge whether they have Ebola.


http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/16/health/us-ebola/index.html

As for being symptomatic, the articles and links have been posted multiple places. Here is one: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025679070#post70

If you know you have been exposed to Ebola and you are within the incubation window, and you are feeling flu-like symptoms and any temperature which is not normal for you, you don't hop on a plane. Twice. As for the magic number used by the CDC, it is pretty meaningless. A substantial number of people do not run a fever with Ebola.

Lots of people (including CDC and Texas) made stupid mistakes. The fact that others also made stupid mistakes does not excuse the the ones the nurse made, particularly since she was not custodial or other staff who could not necessarily be expected to have at least a minimum knowledge about disease transmission.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #166)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:42 PM

169. You would think the people who dealt directly with Mr Duncan are hot properties for interviews

They couldn't speak of the experience much because of privacy laws but surely there is public interest in them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #169)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:47 PM

173. I notice you have still not provided a link supporting your assertion that they were still working.

I've provided all I have been able to find, which suggests (but is not definitive) that they were not working.

If they were not working - no reason for outrage. If they were working - and there was no public statement that they were continuing to work - no one would have a reason to be outraged because you can't be outraged about something you don't know about.

And I have no clue what the rest of your response is about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #173)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:56 PM

179. You're right, I don't have any absolute proof, spent a while looking and just decided to fly with it

I've been following this fairly closely for days now and the information that has come out is abysmal, the miserable state of the press is a rant for a different thread though.

The whole kick down kiss up authoritarian attitude I've seen here on DU immediately unloading on the low level employee while excusing the authorities has sickened me.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #179)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:16 PM

186. I'm not excusing anyone -

I have criticized everyone, including Nurse Vinson, Texas Presbyterian, and the CDC for the mistakes that someone who has had training in universal precautions, and experience in using it in dealing with fecal matter and disease transmission (i.e. me) can easily see are insufficient. I expect the CDC and those providing medical care to have at least that much training, and to employ that knowledge with the level of rigor appropriate to caring for someone with a deadly disease for which there is no effective treatment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #179)


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #173)

Sun Oct 19, 2014, 09:19 AM

208. its here in this thread

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #208)

Sun Oct 19, 2014, 09:44 AM

211. Thanks.

Which still explains why there wasn't public outrage (the question I entered this particular subthread to answer) - it was not public knowledge until yesterday. Can't be outraged about what you don't know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ms. Toad (Reply #211)

Sun Oct 19, 2014, 10:04 AM

212. Agreed. I was just answering your question to Fumesucker

 

The hospital staff was expected to keep working after Mr Duncan died. Nobody was told to stop until Nina Pham came down with Ebola.

It just speaks to Fumesucker's bigger point that Amber Vinson had every indication, including from the CDC, that she was not a danger to herself or anyone else so the rush to "blame" her seems unfair. Especially in light that her co-workers - all 75 of them were continuing to work every day - also weren't self-isolating themselves, its hard to watch this one person get character assassinated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #212)

Sun Oct 19, 2014, 03:50 PM

214. That, I don't buy.

I have had far less medical training that Amber Vinson, and I know better than to get on a plane when I am feeling fatigue, malaise, and running a temperature of 99.4 degrees while I am in the incubation period after being exposed to Ebola. (And one additional report from an unnamed Federal official also includes muscle aches.) You just watched Ebola kill someone you have been taking care of, and you have symptoms identical to the early stages of Ebola (yes, consistent with other diseases as well, but from a medical perspective once you have been exposed to Ebola you should assume any symptoms consistent with Ebola IS Ebola until proven otherwise).

That doesn't excuse the actions of the CDC, or Texas Presbyterian - but their boneheaded mistakes also do not excuse hers. Virtually everyone here screwed up, including Amber Vinson.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #6)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:47 AM

46. ^=== This. Heaven help me, I am dealing with it now.

 

"Management science" --

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #6)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:48 AM

57. "The Great and Powerful Oz has got matters well in hand - I hope"

"So you can all go.......home -- and there's nothing to worry about."


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #6)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:52 AM

87. Well, the best manager I ever worked for wasn't a technical expert, but he WAS

an expert at determining who the technical experts were, listening to them about the technical facts and their suggestions, and then leading the team in taking action, and getting roadblocks moved out of the way. (I'm very sorry to learn in my later life experience that there are very few like him ... and sadly he later succumbed to alcoholism, which was in remission at the time I knew him, and I never even knew about it then.)

I will wait and see how the Ebola "czar" works out. It seems to me that there is already plenty of technical expertise; what is needed is someone who is good at coordinating the experts to take the right actions AND moving bureaucratic bullshit out of their way. Neither of those skills require the manager to have the technical expertise himself - although a general background in the domain would sure help in weighing any conflicting technical contributions from the team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #6)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:29 PM

167. Exactly! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #6)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:21 PM

205. 'I'm not a scientist' should work ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #2)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:15 AM

50. Yes yes yes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #2)


Response to ann--- (Reply #76)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:51 AM

86. And an ethical girl!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MoonRiver (Reply #86)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:36 AM

96. from what I've read, they are both WOMEN, not girls.

or did I misread their ages?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kath (Reply #96)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:42 AM

97. Definitions are for

the little people. You are authorized to be outraged.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kath (Reply #96)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:48 AM

99. Infantilizing language is acceptable for women.

No one would ever think to call a man a "smart boy" in similar circumstances. And as a side note, I wish that some adult women would stop embracing this language.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gormy Cuss (Reply #99)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:39 AM

116. God, yes

Just the other day an executive in the company I work for called my co-worker and I 'girls'. "How are you girls doing?" I wanted to vomit. My co-worker is 22. I'm 39. We both have degrees. Just ugh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gormy Cuss (Reply #99)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:35 AM

140. You'll have to have a word with my 80-something mother.

 

She and her similarly-aged friends constantly refer to their group as "the girls."

I don't know about smart boys, but I have heard about good ole' boys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #140)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:08 PM

182. First off, it's different for equals to use juvenile terms among themselves to describe themselves.

Second, she's from a generation where women were routinely assumed to be less intelligent, less mature, and generally less capable than men and calling them "girls" reinforced that. It was similar to calling adult African-American men "boys."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kath (Reply #96)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:48 AM

100. Yes, they are both women.

One woman behaved ethically, the other selfishly, imho.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:23 AM

4. The cruise ship (floating petri dish) is almost worse than the flight imo...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #4)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:34 AM

8. I have a hard time thinking of a legal job more physically intimate than a nurse

If they were cleared to work why should they have any reason to think they might be contagious?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #8)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:50 AM

119. The answer to your question is that capitalism doesn't really care about the lives of

 

nurses (aka 'workers'). Capitalism views labor as just another commodity to be exploited for the surplus value that can be extracted from it and then discarded when of no further use.

So capitalism needs the 'work' its commodified workers provide -- hence, no objections to possibly contagious workers continuing to work around uninfected patiennts -- but does not need them as 'consumers' of its privatized modes of production.

Your OP, btw, is absolutely spot-on. Anyone still criticizing those nurses for ANYTHING needs to pull their head out of their ass and ask themselves why they still call themselves 'Democrat'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:50 AM

11. i may have been too young to get Quincy w/ jack klugman, but even i would have been

'are you kidding me?!?'. i would have demand refunds for any ticket. + hazard pay. shit. call a lawyer. amerika means lawsuits. right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pansypoo53219 (Reply #11)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:56 AM

13. Why when you're still working?

Evidently everything is OK and you're totally not contagious, no one is freaking about you working with immune compromised patients.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 04:08 AM

14. I'm so glad this virus isn't *easily* transmissible

Because we would be living through a horror movie if it were transmissible before people were symptomatic. What all seven billion of us would be going through if that were so is, almost literally, unimaginable. As it is, the ball has been dropped repeatedly because humans are humans.

I think it would be extremely helpful if airlines would institute a no-questions-asked policy towards people who ask to reschedule flights if they're not feeling well (or for heaven's sake if they've been exposed to Ebola in any way). Without knowing for sure whether Thomas Eric Duncan realized that there was even a tiny tiny tiny chance he had Ebola when he was asked on his way here (I personally think he must have had some idea that he was, at the very least, exposed if not infected), I can't help wondering whether a person traveling from Liberia, where income is lower than it is here and airline tickets commensurately even more of an investment, might have had an incentive to simply roll the dice. I myself doubt that he had a 100% clear conscience, but he also realized that nobody would have thanked him or compensated him if he'd decided not to travel, had to reschedule at his own expense, and turned out to be completely well. I think that a penalty-free refund or rescheduling policy from the airlines would have been extremely helpful in his case and in the nurse's case as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renate (Reply #14)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 04:20 AM

17. In that case anyone not naturally immune would have been dead for a few decades now

We're talking "The Stand" type scenario.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renate (Reply #14)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:27 AM

111. You are right about the tickets

Tickets should be refundable by law. This is a public safety disaster made worse by greed. Airlines afraid to lose a little money show no mercy. Hospitals that have improved profits by cutting staffing to the bone are afraid they cannot function if they ask exposed staff to stay home.

But the little people with the least control over their situation, who can least afford or or spread the costs, always take the blame.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 04:11 AM

15. Why are you so dedicated to defending this woman's selfish/idiotic actions?

Seriously? The more of the story that comes out the worse she looks, and yet you still defend her.

She is a medical professional that should know the basics of infectious disease, especially one as deadly as Ebola. All the buck passing about her employer and the CDC hotline do nothing to change the fact that she knew she had been exposed and started to feel sick but flew anyway. She should have taken some personal responsibility, applied some common sense, and stayed the fuck home. Her inconvenience and loneliness are immaterial.

The apologetics for this woman need to stop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostInAnomie (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 04:14 AM

16. Then she shouldn't have been caring for patients

None of them should have been caring for patients.

The apologetics for the authorities need to stop.

Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #16)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 04:52 AM

18. What apologetics?

I agree. She shouldn't be treating anyone or flying. The treating patients is a matter for her and her union to handle. The flying is a choice all her own. She is a nurse and should known the risks. CDC approval of not, she should have stayed the hell away from mass transit. She is either wildly incompetent or selfish beyond words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostInAnomie (Reply #18)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 04:58 AM

19. No the flying, just like treating patients was approved

She is human, humans are often selfish, she took reasonable steps to assure she was not endangering anyone.

If the nurse is "wildly incompetent" what does that make the authorities?

Bear in mind the information was filtered through two layers of authorities evidently, both the CDC and Texas health were involved.

And now we have a politically connected lawyer as Ebola Czar?

Sounds like the real task is going to be perception management.

ETA: One last point, this is Texas, nurse Vinson has no union and can be fired at any moment for anything at all or nothing at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostInAnomie (Reply #18)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:52 AM

88. I had a thought that it's as basic as safe cooking

When I cook pork, poultry or ground beef, I'm more careful to
only use my utensils for only that purpose. I may use them
"Once and done" or I will keep them dedicated to the meat
prep until they can be washed thoroughly. Why? Because
I dont want to possibly contaminate the other food with
raw juices or germs. I also cook it until it's done, possible germs killed,
and won't make people sick. Why do I display a different
level of concern when cooking pork, ground beef, or poultry?
Because the risk is greater.

Same should be done with treating Ebola, except the nursing
and other staff are the utensils. They come in contact with
A contagious patient, they are dedicated to that patient until
the last day of the incubation period is over counting days from
the last day of working with that patient OR they are "one and
done" for a 21 day quarantine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostInAnomie (Reply #18)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:43 AM

118. for her and her union?

Please give us a break. She works at a hospital, presumably run by doctors. They are responsible for exposing all who this nurse treated (even if not for her initial exposure). They should have at least given her three weeks paid leave. How about some criticism of them? Do we even know one of the hospital administrators by name?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #16)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:16 AM

95. The "authorities" are not responsible for EVERYTHING

And every single decision someone makes. Especially when they are not someone's direct boss. I suppose I will be called an authoritarian, but really, an authoritarian is one who simply obeys authorities and you are justifying that.

And people are oversensitive. Merely because a fellow nurse is criticized. It does not mean the whole profession is being trashed. It means that one individual is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #95)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:51 AM

121. She obeyed authority, did what they said she should do and then what they said she could do

Yes, the authorities are completely responsible for this incident which would not have happened had they done their job as they are (vastly over) paid to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #121)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:53 PM

196. No one has to follow authority slavishly

In fact, I thought that was bad? Shouldn't she have at least thought for herself a bit? You're justifying slavish following of authority.

Really I think some DUers simply hate people being in authority and will use any excuse to trash them. They want them to be always wrong. They say we should never listen to them, and now in a case where someone did, it's all their fault.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #16)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:34 AM

139. She wasn't caring for patients while sick

But chose to fly once she was sick, while presumably on some time off. I think people can question authority and make their own judgments, which is what many of us are saying we would have done, and not flew. Don't conflate this argument with apologetics for the authorities. Misstating people's position needs to stop. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elias7 (Reply #139)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:43 AM

142. Her first flight she was feeling well

It's the second flight back to Dallas (and her job incidentally) that she got a slight fever, almost a full degree below the official mark.

At that point the CDC could have told her no, go to the hospital and I'm quite sure she would have done that. Instead when she called with the information her temperature was slightly elevated she was told to get on the plane.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostInAnomie (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:05 AM

20. The personal attacks on this woman are what should stop.

They serve no helpful purpose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostInAnomie (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:29 AM

67. She was following CDC guidelines. She called to check.

Practically no one in this country has any expertise in Ebola. Nurses are highly trained and know perfectly well that the guidelines set up to deal with infectious disease must be followed.

She followed those guidelines. Apparently she had doubts and called again to check, probably because she heard the news about the other nurse.

Your theory that she should somehow "know" is ridiculous. No nurse or other HCW who has been told they are safe to treat patients would assume that they are a risk to other persons.

When she called the number she was given and was told that it was okay to get on the plane, it was or should have been automatically clear to her that if she went to a hospital she wouldn't be treated as a suspect Ebola patient.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostInAnomie (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:37 AM

72. She should be expected to know more than her employer or the CDC?

I get it. Kiss up, kick down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostInAnomie (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:16 AM

130. I agree

Her behavior was unethical. Perhaps she was in denial. It would be hard to face the idea that she may have a deadly disease. Nonetheless, she is a medical professional who knew she was sick. Her behavior was reckless and extremely costly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LostInAnomie (Reply #15)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:03 PM

202. The CDC told her she could fly. What higher authority do you want, God?

I was running a low-grade fever for a few days and thought it could be a cold or the flu. I called my doctor to ask if I should pick up a mask at the ER next to his office before coming in for a blood draw that was scheduled for one of the days I ran 100.6 -- a higher fever than what Amber Vinson was running. He said not to bother, so I didn't. I did my best not to breathe on anybody. I barely had any other symptoms other than a fever except a little bit of a runny nose, but no worse than allergy season does to me.

If I got an elderly or immunocompromised patient (they do chemo in the same building) infected with that cold I'll feel bad, but I did what my doctor told me.

I know Ebola is not a cold, but a person can run 99.5 and just be running that from working out or being in a hot state like Texas during warm fall weather -- 99.6 is the limit for some doctors to even call it a fever. I've ran 99.5 and been just fine. The guidelines say 100.4 now, which is obviously too high if she was running 99.5 with what we call symptoms. Malaise, fatigue, and muscle aches can be signs of stress, and taking care of an Ebola patient sure is stressful.

The CDC should have been more on the ball -- I've always felt, though it would suck for the workers caring for these patients, that the workers should be isolated for 21 days -- all of them that handled the virus, came in contact with the patient, etc. That includes the lab tech quarantined on the cruise ship. But we aren't doing that. So what else do you want people to do, besides calling the #1 health authority in the country and reporting their temp and getting advice?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:19 AM

21. This is such garbage. She made a decision NOT to purchase travel insurance for those tickets

which meant, if she didn't go, she's out the money for them. Or, she could have bought refundable tickets.

She didn't do either, so she put herself in the position of losing the money for the tickets the day she clicked
on accepting them--without the insurance--and decided to buy the cheapest tickets, not the refundable ones.

You can't go back and do over decisions. Turns out, bad decision not to pay for the travel insurance.
If she'd had travel insurance--and you take money out of the equation--would she STILL have decided
to make that trip because it was all wedding plans? Can't know.

All I know is that I hope she recovers and gets to wear the wedding dress and walk down the aisle
to marry her fiance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #21)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:24 AM

22. Are you in the travel insurance industry by chance?

I've heard that several times from you now. Not buying travel insurance is not a crime.

You really want someone to blame so the authorities don't look as foolish as they do.

You totally ignore my point the she was fine to work with immune compromised sick people according to the authorities and no one questioned that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #22)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:48 AM

31. No. In fact, I'm a retired hospital administrator married to an MD who is scared

irrational about exposure to Ebola by flying. The way I look at it, the real risk is to health care professionals treating Ebola
patients. I'm more concerned about catching a nasty flu--which I have--from flying, than catching Ebola. That said,
there have been many, many bad decisions at all levels from all sorts of folks since Duncan arrived in the US and presented
himself to the ER at Texas Presbyterian. I know ordinary people in Dallas look at it as a hospital of choice--in fact
I know someone who's been a patient there--but I took one look at its structure and organization when Duncan first
hit the news and knew we were in trouble. I could have told you, with 95% certainty, there would be secondary
cases coming out of there from either docs or nurses or other health care professionals who took care of him.
It's a nasty, horrible, awful disease with really really bad chances for recovery. It's not transmitted through casual
contact, yet I worry--having seen recommendations that health care professionals should be wearing respirators
when treating Ebola patients--that transmission can occur through aerosolized particles that have heavy viral loads.
I doubt it was a coincidence that the grad student at Yale that was suspected of having Ebola was immediately
isolated in a negative pressurized room. Texas Presbyterian Hospital personnel screwed up--at all levels--when
treating Duncan. The CDC did not help, either.

That said, trying to use the argument that the nurse would lose her money if she didn't fly--well, that's because
she chose the least expensive tickets (non-refundable) and passed on purchasing travel insurance. HER decision--
not knowing what the future would bring she was playing the odds.

Just because the hospital screwed up, didn't mean she needed to screw up and made a decision based on money.
I still think, though, that the meaning of the trip to her was more about wedding plans, than losing the cost of her
ticket.


Money is the least of her worries now. Water under the bridge. I hope she recovers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #31)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:56 AM

33. To be fair none of us know what the future will bring

I just find the focus of apparent hatred on this one person who is already facing possibly a miserable fate soon really triggers my sympathy with her.

This is obviously a person who cares or she wouldn't be facing what she is at the moment, the hatred and lack of sympathy for her I see in some is rather disturbing when in reality it was the elites and the system that caused the problem and put her in this position in the first place.

If the hospital had done what the administrators assured us had been done then nurse Vinson would not be facing such an uncertain fate with millions of Americans hating her with a white hot fury.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #33)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:04 AM

49. My sympathies are with her, too.

Many of the problems come back to money. My hunch is that employees
were asked to volunteer to take care of Duncan, and probably offered
a substantial premium to do so. The hospital did not, however,
spend the money to insure the employees were all adequately trained
and provided with necessary protective gear. That's the upfront risk.
Then there's the AFTER risk, which means anyone who came in contact
with him to provide care needed to be closely monitored.

I imagine she made a tough choice--knowing she had upcoming wedding
plans-- and probably was offered a LOT of money to take care of him, and
really didn't adequately think through the risk and what it could mean
in terms of her exposure to him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #49)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:20 AM

51. Phrases that should not be used while making conclusions: 'my hunch is that' and 'I imagine she'

 

'probably was'.

All of that is nothing but speculation, assumption, and conjecture, elevated to the status of fact in your mind as your hunch tells you what to imagine probably happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #51)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:34 AM

54. And your point is?

That there's a chance she thought, I'm invincible, I know what I'm doing, screw anybody
else, I'm living my life? Sure, that's possible, too.

The entire OP is nothing but conjecture. I never offered my speculation as anything else.
Why else would I use the language I did?

So, what's your point? We should never hypothesize about anything because we can't
know anybody else's experience and what criteria they are using to make decisions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #54)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:17 AM

131. yes, please stop the speculation

Some might take your hunches as fact, coming as they do from the retired health care administrator wife of an MD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #49)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:27 AM

53. Simpler for the hospital just to fire those who won't do it

I've heard absolutely nothing about any bonuses, I think by now some whisper of that would have hit the airwaves, any money grubbing on the part of low level employees would be big news in the M$M.

Yeah it was a tough choice alright, lose your job which you've already moved across country recently to get or care for an Ebola patient.

You vastly overestimate the humanity of the hospital management.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #53)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:50 AM

58. The employees were told not to talk to the media. That is not unusual.

All hospitals have policy in place for who talks to the media.

I vastly overestimate the humanity of hospital management? Really. I think I'm pretty
realistic about how hospital management makes decisions--given that I was an assistant
administrator in a well known Los Angeles teaching hospital for many years. Did I agree
with every decision made by the Executive Director? No. And that's one of the reasons I left the field. But there are
a lot of very dedicated people in management at all levels in lots of hospitals. They're not all MBA automatons.
Many of us have MPH's--with a significant respect and appreciation for all types of professional staff that
provide hands on care to patients.


Before Pham departed for the National Institute of Health’s Clinical Center, Dr. Gary Weinstein visited with her and recorded his conversation before she was discharged. Pham asked that the hospital share the video.

She’s seen sitting in bed propped up by pillows, a poster with what looks like signatures and well-wishes hanging on the wall.

In the video, Weinstein thanks Pham for getting well and being part of the volunteer team to take care of Thomas Eric Duncan, the Liberian man who died of Ebola. Pham jokes with the health care workers.


http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/2014/10/cdc-director-frieden-we-do-not-yet-know-exactly-how-ebola-transmissions-occurred-at-texas-health-presbyterian.html/





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #58)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:57 AM

60. Can you explain to me then why the nurses were still working up until Vinson's flight drew attention

Seriously, you would think think medically knowledgeable management who genuinely cared about their workers and public health would offer them a paid respite to self quarantine.

Assuming of course that anyone in management thought self-quarantine was remotely necessary.

Oh, and being told not to talk to the media is not the same thing as agreeing not to talk to the media, that's why the nurse's union had to release a statement from the nurses at the hospital, they were afraid of retaliation.

At every turn the hospital first tried to put the blame on a nurse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #60)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:59 AM

90. I am not--and if you look at my posts for the last few days have never--defended the hospital.

In fact, I've posted that the first thing I did was look up the organization and structure of
the hospital and then predicted I'd expect screw-ups. Why? Because I've been there.
I saw the move toward a business model for hospital management developing in the late 70's,
early 80's, and I didn't like it. I worked in a hospital that experienced a union organizing
drive. Frankly, I thought it would be helpful if the employees had succeeded in voting in
the union. I kept that opinion to myself. The union lost. I moved on in 1985 and never
considered going back to work in hospital management.

Only the people who made the decisions about staffing can explain their decisions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #90)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:28 AM

112. I didn't intend to accuse you of anything in that post

I was asking what your speculation might be as to why the nurses were allowed to continue to work after it was known that they may have been exposed..

If it was so horribly irresponsible to travel, why is it not also equally irresponsible to care for patients in the same condition?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #112)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:54 AM

146. All I can do is speculate about the challenges faced by nursing admins in staffing

to care for all patients in the hospital.

If you read--or listen-- the interview with the doc that I've posted elsewhere
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025683949

you will learn that the hospital isolated him in ICU--AFTER they moved all other
ICU patients out.

That means they had an ICU nursing staff--probably among the youngest and best educated
nurses in the hospital--having to rotate elsewhere to care for those displaced ICU patients OR
volunteer to care for Mr. Duncan. Or both. The doc said they had no problem getting volunteers.
At the point he was being cared for in the ICU, they were following CDC protocols, and later, the additional
recommendation that all staff wear respirators. So, I can understand the health care professional point of
view that they consider themselves to be low risk--because they are wearing protective gear. The doc still
thinks he's low risk.

The medical POV--conservative POV--is that Ebola is not transmitted through aerosolization. There are others
that aren't so sure--and if you read--listen to this doc--he wonders (but isn't challenged by the interviewer)
if the two nurses didn't catch Ebola when Mr. Duncan was spewing huge viral loads of bodily fluids and they
were NOT YET wearing respirators--which were later added to the equipment requested by the team caring
for Mr. Duncan.

After he dies, what to do with the ICU nurses who treated Mr. Duncan? Nurses are always in short supply--and
the better trained/educated ones are certainly in short supply. If they all consider themselves low risk...well,
it would have been interesting to be in a meeting devoted to staffing issues at that point in time.

Beyond that...I can't speculate.

As for me being out of date by 30 years--well, principles of management and criteria used to make decisions don't become
outdated--unless the overall system changes dramatically. And it hasn't.


Incidentally, the fear has spread and according to this report, the hospital has become a ghost town.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/ebola-scare-turns-dallas-hospital-ghost-town/story?id=26276610


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #146)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:09 PM

155. Thank you..

I've read some really vile things written about this woman, some of them here on DU and it has upset me that someone who may well die horribly for the sin of helping another person is subject to such vituperation because she did what we are taught to do which is trust the scientific experts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #90)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:23 AM

133. oh, that's important

Your experience in hospital administration Ender thirty years ago. It was bad then and going downhill. And now you think nurses got large hazard pay bonuses?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #33)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:58 AM

123. Allow me to restate your position (with which I agree 1000%) as simply as possible:

 

The authorities had no problem with her continuing to work with\provide care for uninfected patients. But it (and those criticizing her here) has a problem with her decision to fly after the CDC cleared the flight.

I mean, WTF??????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #31)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:39 AM

74. This is not my conversation, please excuse the insert, but

I have to say, I am offended on the nurse's behalf to see this superior attitude towards her based on financial decisions, particularly from a self described retired Hospital Administor married to an MD.

In other words, it may seem like a no brainer to someone with a high double income, to spring for the travel insurance, but I assure you, a single nurse working in what was clearly a cheap ass hospital may not have such an easy choice. There but for Grace, my friend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanlassie (Reply #74)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:50 AM

84. Superior attitude? What a bunch of malarkey.

Offering up the consideration of the fact that anyone who buys a ticket on-line is offered travel
insurance to jumping to the conclusion that I always buy travel insurance because I'm well off
is way off the mark.

I have bought travel insurance once. Just once. My husband and I detest the insurance industry.
We have been supporters of single payer--national health plan (no insurance industry) for YEARS.
We don't even have life insurance. There was a time in our lives when we went bare--without health
insurance.

The one time I bought travel insurance was for a week scheduled at the beach during hurricane season
and the prediction by those in the know was we were in for a more than normal season of hurricanes.
We ended up not needing it.

I have never bought travel insurance for any other trip--and we've done a lot of traveling--but it doesn't
mean that it isn't available or might not be a good idea for someone to consider. It all depends upon a person's
circumstances.

All I'm saying is don't be so quick to condemn hospital management for making decisions based on finances
when there is a possibility that finances were something the nurse also considered when she bought her ticket.

We all make decisions based on finances. Every damn one of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #84)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:54 AM

89. Yes, we all make decisions based on finances.

And you are extremely critical that this nurse didn't purchase any. Why didn't you purchase travel insurance all those times? After all, apparently the both of you were in high risk jobs...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanlassie (Reply #89)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:07 AM

91. I have never criticized her decision not to purchase travel insurance. I simply offered the

consideration, that she COULD have done so. Does she wish she had? My guess is,
that she didn't really think about being quarantined getting in the way of making the
trip. It didn't really hit her. She was going to make that trip--because it was all about
the wedding plans.

I don't know when she bought the ticket. I haven't seen it reported anywhere whether
she bought it prior to volunteering to care for an Ebola patient. Or maybe her family
bought the ticket for her. Who knows? The point is SHIT happens. In this case,
it really has happened to her.

I just think the argument is bogus--because nobody knows who bought it or when or what she was thinking
when the ticket was purchased and travel insurance was turned down (yes, you have to click you
don't want it)-- to bemoan the fact that she'd lose the money spent for the trip if she didn't
go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #91)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:16 AM

94. "She was going to make the trip because it was

All about the wedding plans." Got it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanlassie (Reply #74)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:00 AM

124. +Infinity. If there's one thing I despise even more than Republicans, it's self-satisfied

 

smug holier-than-thou bullshit from well-heeled Dems.

Bravo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanlassie (Reply #74)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:45 PM

172. The bigger offense is implying she was making the decision based on money loss!!!

Painting a picture of someone's character based on 0
AND fuck that travel insurance crap if it was all about cash why would she call several times to she if she should avoid the flight home??????????Answer me that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunasun (Reply #172)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:51 PM

177. +10000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #21)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:32 AM

68. lol - this is a new low. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #21)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:48 PM

175. Why should she have needed 'travel insurance' if she had called the airlines to tell them

she had been exposed to Ebola and could not fly? Why would the airlines refuse to refund her ticket money in such a case? Do we always need to 'cover' the Corps losses no matter what the circumstances and NEVER expect THEM to be as 'responsible' as we expect of the 'little people'?

Do we KNOW that the airlines would not have refunded her money under the circumstances? You seem to feel that the airlines should NOT be out the ticket money? Ins has zero to do with this. I would hope that the airlines would have refunded her money, but from your post I'm assuming they would have refused UNLESS she had insurance?? What a horror of a society this is becoming. Money trumps all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:26 AM

23. This is what happened to me...

... a few years back. I have a gazillion (it seems) nieces and nephews. The eldest of them, that precious little tyke I watched grow up, was going to walk down the aisle in Holy matrimony. It was a great joyous day for the family. Sadly, I had to bow out. I could not attend my beloved nephew's wedding celebration because I had the SHINGLES. My immediate family could not believe that I was not going to attend. Feelings were hurt all the way around. I had to explain to them that it was highly likely that there would be many women present of child baring age. My Shingles could cause complications to pregnant women I came in contact with, and more directly to the child inside of them, causing birth defects. Come to find out, a couple months later we learned that two of my nieces were several months pregnant and had been present at that wedding.

Now, I learned this valuable information after having worked in the medical field for many years as a lab tech. It is my opinion that the nurse who traveled after having been exposed to Mr Duncan should have been held under a strict quarantine. IMHO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReRe (Reply #23)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:31 AM

25. I don't disagree with you, the nurse should have been quarantined

But I'm pointing out that not only was she not quarantined she was allowed to work with immune compromised patients, indeed I wouldn't be surprised if she would have been sanctioned if she didn't come to work, most likely fired.

I'm trying to explain the the thought processes I believe this woman went through, she was most likely expecting to be quarantined and then when no one said anything to her about what was she to think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #25)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:10 AM

41. I agree...

... I almost added that. Look it... it happened in Texassistan. Where science is frowned upon. At a point in time when government institutions have been ravaged by budget cuts and ignorance for years. I think this whole thing might have unfolded differently had we had a real genuine Surgeon General at the helm. In this particular case, it seemed like everything fell through. The Hospital Administrators, State and local Health Depts, The "Governor", the Mayor, the CDC. Everything fell through.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:30 AM

24. I think she made a foolish and very dangerous choice.

Even if she didn't care about strangers on the planes, lots of people don't, she put her family and friends, including a little 10 year girl, at risk. If I, with no medical training but a lot of common sense, had just cared for a guy who died of ebola, and, subsequently, had even a slightly elevated temp., no way would I have risked exposing my loved ones to this deadly disease. I think the situation is pretty simple. It was all about her and what she wanted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MoonRiver (Reply #24)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:32 AM

26. Was her working also a "foolish and dangerous choice"?

Indeed, was it a choice at all or would she have been fired if she self quarantined?

Remember this is Texas and the hospital is non-union.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #26)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:36 AM

29. I'm just talking about how I would have handled the situation.

You posted your scenario, this is mine. Caring for a person who died of ebola puts one immediately at high risk for catching the disease, especially considering the crap for PPE those nurses wore. I, personally, would not have risked my loved ones lives under the circumstances. Even if someone is completely asymptomatic, we all know that can turn on a dime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #26)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:04 AM

36. Your bringing up "would she have been fired" is a complete straw man.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #36)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:11 AM

42. The nurses had to go through the national union to speak up about what was going on there

They were afraid of being fired if they talked about conditions at the hospital.

That's evidence of a hostile relationship between management and the nurses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #36)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:08 AM

127. A 'complete straw man'? Had she failed to report for a

 

scheduled shift, TX Presbyterian could have fired Vinson in a heartbeat and, since TX is a 'right to work' state, she would have had little or no recourse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KingCharlemagne (Reply #127)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:25 AM

134. Would not have happened..here's why

All she had to do was to call any media outlet and tell them that her employers were insisting that she continue to work as a nurse..

Anyone exposed at work, should be put up at NO cost to them (somewhere away from others)..in ISOLATION... they should be fed, PAID, and tended to. any non refundable travel plans should be reimbursed by the employer.

It sucks to be isolated, but this is the only way to make sure that everyone else feels less compromised.. Look at the HUGE sums of money that has been wasted on the extra cleaning, notifying, and classes canceled, businesses closed etc. Those are real costs, even if they are unnecessary. The women who worked at that bridal shop lost pay....schools lost federal money...

I am so pissed at our ignorant media for stirring up irrational fears, but we have what we have, and the only people in charge of mollifying the public are the ones who have been identified as exposed..

All she needed to do was to call her Ohio relatives and tell them that plans had to be changed..



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SoCalDem (Reply #134)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:32 AM

137. Well, as it happens, you're the one who is wrong. The nurses at this particular

 

hospital, not just Nurse Vinson, were so afraid of losing their jobs if they spoke out that they had to go through the National Nurse's Union to let it be known that there was NO PROTOCOL for the first two days after Duncan was admitted.

And you expect that Vinson could just 'call any media outlet' and be assured she would still have a job?

I think you and I inhabit different universes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:32 AM

27. Look, the nurse on the cruise ship acted like a normal human being.

She had tickets, paid for. Sshe had a fantasy trip she'd been thinking about for months. She MAY have had contact with material from the now-deceased guy. She went on the trip. Many of us would have done the same thing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrike47 (Reply #27)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:34 AM

28. I think most of these "holier than thou" types would have done just the same thing

"Hey, I'm still working with sick people, I can't be contagious or they would have told me not to do that."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrike47 (Reply #27)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:01 PM

149. she quit being a "normal human being" when she was told to isolate & monitor

after being exposed to a deadly disease. Anyone with normal intellect knows that it's almost impossible to catch in a casual setting, BUT the media hype and constantly changing dos & don'ts should have set off alarm bells for her, and it was her bad choice to travel..

My guess is that if she had called Carnival and told them that she was asymptomatic, but had been exposed to ebola, they would have gladly re-booked at no charge when she was released from the isolation period..

This is the sort of thing that happens when we have a lackadaisical public health system...people do not think beyond their own immediate wants..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrike47 (Reply #27)


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:47 AM

30. please just do what you think fits

 

i think you should really fly to your family but then,what of other passengers in the plane?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:56 AM

32. I'm wondering why we are taking Amber Vinson's word for that alleged call.

 

Has anyone stepped forward to say, "I did it; I'm the CDC person who gave the all-clear to Amber Vinson."?

Have you never wanted to do something knowing or at least having a gut feeling that you shouldn't, so you sought "permission" to do it, STILL KNOWING YOU SHOULDN'T? Did she give her full physical condition (there are conflicting stories as to her temperature) over the phone

TEDuncan's family wanted to go grocery shopping; Dr. Nancy Snyderman wanted soup; a nurse wanted to get fitted for her wedding; another worker wanted her cruise. Nobody wants to think of others.

One thing's now clear: Belize doesn't play.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #32)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:59 AM

34. I like how everyone ignores the fact the Ebola exposed nurses had been working

When you address that matter we can go on with the conversation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #34)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:02 AM

35. I don't understand your sentence: "had been working." What? I mean, isn't that the point?

 

They had been working. Do they not read the news of their own potential fates?

And BTW, you aren't exactly the Conversation Arbiter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #35)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:07 AM

39. Up until the travel brouhaha the nurses had continued with their dail lives, including work..

Their work entails interacting physically in very intimate ways with often immune compromised people who would be easy meat for Ebola.

What is so difficult to understand that Ebola exposed people should not nurse others?

That they were allowed and probably would have been forced to continue work indicates the experts thought they were no risk of transmitting diseases whether that's true or not.

This is an enormous failure of the core competencies of the medical system and everyone wants to focus on one nurse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #39)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:48 AM

144. Yes but no one reported feeling sick

Until this nurse, who was no longer taking care of patients but had a string of days off.

Might she not have called in sick to work in your scenario?

I don't your adamance on the point of nurses continuing to work despite Ebola exposure. First, they cared for Ebola patients and may or may not have been exposed. Two were, most weren't. Second, if they are not ill, they are not contagious. Third, if they feel ill, the responsible choice is to not work and not fly.

If you are saying that everyone involved in any way with that patients care should be in quarantine, then you would have seen rapid depletion of not only nurses, but housekeepers, lab and radiography techs, doctors, food service people, with one to two weeks of illness duration. What you're suggesting makes no sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elias7 (Reply #144)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:03 PM

152. Yes, they may or may not have been exposed

That's exactly my point, it's obvious that some were exposed since they managed to get the disease.

I'm pointing out the innate lack of rationality in the contrast between "Oh isn't that nice, she's still caring for sick people in the hospital" and "ZOMG!! EBOLAWOMAN got on an AIRPLANE WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE BECUZ OF HER!!!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #39)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:50 PM

176. I don't care who they worked with except under 2 conditions.

1. While caring for MrDuncan, they should have been assigned only to him, not to him then leave the room and go care for someone else.
2. While symptomatic and contagious, fever, feeling crapppy, etc.

Otherwise, asymptomatic and noncontagious? They could work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #32)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:47 AM

81. The CDC has confirmed that she checked, yes.

They did so days ago. It's widely reported. Why do you not accept what you are being told?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #32)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:06 AM

125. I think I read that the CDC (or TX Dept. of Health) confirmed that she had called but

 

without naming the specific staffperson to whom she spoke.

If there were serious question as to whether she actually called, don't you think the CDC would have denied it? I mean the CDC is starting to look like the gang that can't shoot straight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #32)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:46 AM

143. This was confirmed by CDC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #32)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:25 PM

163. The CDC confirmed that she called them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:06 AM

37. I'm a former nurse

An I would not have have gone.

And I am under the impression she called for the flight home, not before she went.

An ounce of prevention, worth a pound of cure. Old saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mgardener54 (Reply #37)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:09 AM

40. Would you also have not cared for patients during this period?

Or is that different somehow?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:07 AM

38. About 15 years ago one of my patients came down with mumps 2 days after I saw her

I was notified by public health and they followed up on everyone she had been in contact with.
I was titered and showed no immunity to mumps so I could not work for the incubation period. I was on work comp. no I did not get them. I was late 50s then and most people my age had the mumps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to newfie11 (Reply #38)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:41 AM

77. Right, but mumps is a highly contagious airborne disease so the guidelines are different.

Here are the official CDC risk guidelines for Ebola:
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/hcp/case-definition.html

She was considered by CDC to have no exposure. NONE. Because CDC says Ebola is very hard to get. Further, they have some evidence for that.

Obviously that wasn't an accurate risk assessment in this case, but the official guidelines haven't been changed yet, and you know why? Because if they were, hospitals would have to be removing doctors and nurses from active care! Then one Ebola case would effectively shut down many hospitals.

I think you are right, which means that I think the CDC is wrong. That terrifies me. Because if the CDC risk guidelines are wrong, then we have a potential disaster on our hands, and I don't think that blaming this nurse is going to get it fixed. That's your logic problem. If you believe what you say as a medical professional, then you ought to be on the phone to your local health department, your state authorities, your federal representative, and any professional societies of which you are member.

Have you done that? Why are you wasting your time on this board if you believe what you say?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #77)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 05:12 PM

197. Chill out honey

I'm just saying my experience with an infectious disease. Go take a chill pill!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:18 AM

43. you go above and contact the CDC. This is analogous to an employer telling an employee to do

something illegal

The only choice one has is to go to a higher authority

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #43)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:52 AM

48. No one has said that anyone objected to the travel plans

Not the CDC and not Texas Health Dept (whatever it might be called), evidently Ms Vinson would have got exactly the same advice straight from the CDC.

This is a world class fuckup on the part of the authorities revealing a staggering lack of competence in those who manage the health system and everyone wants to focus on one nurse.

Nurse Vinson probably did us a favor by bringing to light just how screwed up the system is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #48)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:13 AM

128. I can't believe that anyone who has to work for a living is allowing her to

 

be criticized for this decision, since management and the goveernment may have sentenced her to death through their total and utter shit.

It's outrageous and anyone who works for a a fucking living should be livid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #43)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:23 AM

66. She did that. CDC said she had no exposure.

The standard CDC guidelines for risks STILL DO NOT INCLUDE HCW WHO TREAT EBOLA PATIENTS WHILE WEARING PPE.

That's why she was told to fly. You're not getting it. CDC fucked up.
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/hcp/case-definition.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:27 AM

52. As I posted before...

A responsible person would not, should not put themselves in a situation or place
that would be problematic if they became symptomatic, regardless of what the CDC tells them.
Are these medical people not taught to err on the side of caution and to buck authority if they thought their instructions went against safety?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lars39 (Reply #52)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:43 AM

56. Was she also not supposed to err on the side of caution by refusing to go to work?

I think that's fairly problematic but no one so much as noticed until Ms Vinson got on an airliner.

The forest and the trees, if we stop focusing on the nurse it becomes possible to see the faults in the system that put her in that horrible position in the first place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #56)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:22 AM

65. What are sick leave policies for health care workers?

If they would be quarantined for 21 days would that be covered by sick leave? If they were just under observation would they still receive pay? Is riding in an Airplane that much riskier than going to the grocery store or a movie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Downwinder (Reply #65)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:32 AM

69. What is this "sick leave" of which you speak?

Texas Presbyterian is a non union hospital, sick leave is likely unknown there.

Sick leave in Texas, that's rich.

But thank you for thinking of the workers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #69)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:37 AM

73. Sick leave should be available for any worker that comes

in contact with others. As a public safety issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Downwinder (Reply #73)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:44 AM

79. Yes it should..

I'm not holding my breath while I wait for it to happen.

It took something like my OP for people to realize there are human costs to being a caregiver to an Ebola patient, costs that we at the moment expect them to bear in addition to the risk of catching one of the more disgustingly horrible diseases on the planet.

Anyone who cares for an Ebola patient in the current atmosphere should have their head examined.

Bless their hearts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #79)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:49 AM

82. I thought we learned something from the 1918 flu pandemic.

All history seems to have been forgotten, my error.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Downwinder (Reply #82)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:12 PM

204. We started dismantling our public health infrastructure in the 70s.

 

Part of it was a false confidence that science had triumphed over infectious diseases, part of it was the usual rightwing jackassery. The result of 40 years of disinvestment is now evident.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Downwinder (Reply #65)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:42 AM

78. I don't know what the sick leave policies are at her hospital...

...obviously, but at mine they were abysmal. And while you might get lip service about 'stay home if you're sick' that's all it was -- lip service. Unless you were dying you'd better damn well have shown up for work.

Our health insurance options sucked. Our sick leave policies sucked. Our staffing levels sucked. And our pay scale sucked. There's a reason I no longer work in hospitals. The American health care delivery system is fucked up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeadLetterOffice (Reply #78)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:16 AM

129. American capitalism is fucked up. Health care delivery is part of that capitalism. Otherwise, spot

 

on takedown of the whole sordid mess!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #56)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:51 AM

85. No, she should not have been assigned other patients, ie gone into work.

Yes, she should have been raising hell about the conditions. Systemic faults do not excuse the individuals' responsibility to do what is right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lars39 (Reply #85)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:36 AM

115. And besides, it's so much more fun to beat up on a helpless individual than a faceless bureaucracy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #115)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:01 PM

181. Sorry, that's not going to fly with me....Both the system and she was at fault.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lars39 (Reply #181)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:08 PM

183. Yes, we should all ignore expert instructions for Common Sense

That way we can be sure to beat Ebola, it's just a matter of Common Sense triumphing over those pinhead experts.

The twists and turns people are making to put the blame on the individual are most amusing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #183)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:12 PM

184. So what you are saying is that she "was just following orders".

Like I said, the system and she are both to blame. I'll leave the percentages up to someone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:03 AM

61. Understanding how it happened and being empathetic

is fine. This really shouldn't be about blame in the first place.

At the same time, it's clear to everyone that concerns about travel by folks with developing infections is a very real risk factor when considering infections in American health workers vs poor patients in west Africa, or for that matter, just average working class folks living in Dallas.

Differences between populations must be expected and when learned taken into account, considered by people with the educations and experience to suggest expert reasoned responses to what is learned.

With respect to the statistical probabilities of risk, nothing has changed, the high risk population is exactly what might be expected. The course of infections has been as projected. But, Americans expected something different. They expected their health care system to function perfectly and effectively. The tragedy in Dallas THP hospital gave the nation an "aw, shit!" moment.

American's understanding of factors that -might- effect how well ebola is managed in US hospitals and it's potential for movement around the nation has now very much changed. American's are uncomfortable with that. Confidence has been shaken.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #61)


Response to ann--- (Reply #83)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:43 AM

98. Ann, you continue to nail this situation!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ann--- (Reply #83)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:50 AM

102. Who is doing that?

I'm actually in favor of quarantine but that's not the issue in my OP.

The issue is who gets the blame and I see it as a low level person who was probably prepared to be quarantined and kind of bit surprised when she wasn't and kept right on treating patients at work like nothing ever happened.

As far as the hospital was concerned nothing did happen so they did not inform the CDC that anything happened.

Scientifically I suspect the CDC was right on the threat from Ms Vinson but from a public perceptions standpoint they completely blew it.

Trying to shift the focus off the evil wicked thoughtless greedy nurse and onto the system that totally failed both her and the rest of us is evidently a bad thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #102)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:54 AM

105. The "system" failed her and all of us.

But she behaved selfishly and put her family plus hundreds of strangers at risk. She was a highly knowledgeable health care professional. She should have known better, imo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MoonRiver (Reply #105)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:57 AM

106. No other person even questioned them continuing to work

Nurse Vinson did us a huge favor by showing the awful rot and lack of core competence in the system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #106)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:33 AM

114. Maybe, unless she has infected somebody.

Hopefully that won't be the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #102)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:23 AM

132. To the hospital (and to American captialism writ large), Nurse Vinson was a disposable

 

commodity, to be exploited for any surplus value she might contribute until she either died or keeled over. If that meant having Nurse Vinson continue to work with uninfected, even immune-compromised, patients after having come into contact with Mr. Duncan, well, she was utterly disposable in capitalism's eyes.

Capitalism -- its beneficiaries, managers and goons -- gets the blame. Not the workers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ann--- (Reply #83)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:12 AM

108. It isn't clear to me if it's the same people screaming, but yes, there are people

calling for various travel bans.

As things are, I see two things that are more important than travel bans.

One is breaking the epidemic in Africa, and the other is insuring the US is prepared to deal with the relatively small number of ebola patients that show up in the US, wherever and however they originate.

Ending the epidemic in Africa pretty obviously means lowering potential for unexpectedly importing a case. That's the same goal as a travel ban. Since the outbreak grew serious in March, the number of unplanned imported cases is one.

If the epidemic grows in Africa the number of imported cases is likely to increase proportionate to the epidemic. If it grows 10 times larger, and all other factors remain the same, we might expect a dozen cases. That's still small and because a travel ban would have some leakiness, it must be asked if the ban really provides much increase in security.

Obviously that might change if demographic features of the infected persons in Africa changes.

Shaken American confidence not withstanding, we've still got great places for people to be treated and we have Americans working in the epidemic who may need to return for treatment. The treatment of those persons hasn't increased risk to the public. Treatment of those persons has resulted in availability of plasma to help treat others in the US. On balance, I see no reason to limit planned transportations of persons to suitable American facilities.

Because travel bans can't be perfect, America must be ready with effective responses to identify, isolate and contain any unplanned introduction. We've had a bad experience in the Dallas hospital, but to my knowledge, the measures taken to limit the spread from dozens of potential exposures outside the hospital have worked well. It's pretty clear that the attitude in the US is now one of tightening up protections for health workers. Steps to concentrate expertise and limited resources into a small number of designated treatment centers and to develop capacity to safely transport suspect and proven ebola cases seem to be underway. The dangers to healthcare workers are real, but they are being lessened.

Obviously no one is saying things can't change, or that unexpected changes might need more adaptations in approach and policy. But a run of good outcomes, which I think is a reasonable expectation, will help rebuild confidence, lack of which is current presents the greatest complications/threats to developing effective responses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:09 AM

62. In retrospect I'm pretty sure

Frontier Airlines would have loved to give her her money back or made alternate flying arrangements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:18 AM

63. You've been told you're gtg...head on out.

There's also a great new Iphone out that's hard to find in some areas of the country, relax worry about the more important things in life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:21 AM

64. Thank you for the rationality and the decency

People are blaming the nurse because it's too frightening to accept that our public health authorities are out to lunch on this one.

How anyone could possibly believe that there is more risk involved in being in a public place than in treating sick people is bizarre. Especially those here who claim to be HCW and are still castigating the nurse, when they should know that most of these people were still working.

The FIRST rule of health care is that if you think you have been exposed, you stop working and take it up with the local management. When they clear you, and when the top authority in the land says you have "no exposure", then you continue working.

It is entirely logical to believe that if you have no exposure, you are no danger to the public.

And yes, the CDC definition was that she had no exposure, because she was never treating the patient without PPE.
http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/hcp/case-definition.html
A low risk exposure includes any of the following

Household contact with an EVD patient
Other close contact with EVD patients in health care facilities or community settings. Close contact is defined as
being within approximately 3 feet (1 meter) of an EVD patient or within the patient’s room or care area for a prolonged period of time (e.g., health care personnel, household members) while not wearing recommended personal protective equipment (i.e., standard, droplet, and contact precautions; see Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations)
having direct brief contact (e.g., shaking hands) with an EVD patient while not wearing recommended personal protective equipment.
Brief interactions, such as walking by a person or moving through a hospital, do not constitute close contact


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #64)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:37 AM

71. I've been through several eye-opening events on DU

I think this one has been the most revealing of all. Watching the school of fish dart and dash in unison in response to the changing reporting has been fascinating.

People simply are not rational about this stuff, it triggers atavistic fears we don't know we have.

I saw it pointed out on another board that health workers deal with disease and death and have learned to accept it in a fatalistic manner most of us never can.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #71)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:46 AM

80. Yes, but HCW also acquire a strong determination to avert unnecessary disease and death

So I understand their emotional response, but not the logical error. Any HCW who is saying the nurse is at fault ought to be burning up the lines to get tighter risk guidelines for Ebola, including greatly expanded access to testing.

And anyone who isn't doing that but is blaming the nurse has a huge logical gap in their thinking. The reason I am now doing this is that back in early September, we did all that, and FAILED. So now taking it to the public is the only recourse I can see.

WTF am I supposed to do? Call Rush Limbaugh?

Blaming the nurse is an excuse for inaction rather than a logical response. This is indeed a primitive reaction, akin to scapegoating. It may satisfy an emotional need, but it certainly does not protect anyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #80)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:23 AM

109. Nurse Vinson did us a huge, huge favor and is getting figuratively burned at the stake for it

She exposed just how little functional expertise is available at the management level in our health care system, the administrators must be brain dead to let things slip the way they have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 08:35 AM

70. "Blame the individual" is always the first

response from repugs and third wayers alike (what a coincidence).

It couldn't possibly be a systemic issue.

I am willing to give the administration and CDC some slack - they haven't dealt with Ebola in this country. But that approach is too straight-forward and considered risky by some. They MUST make the individual the culprit because the alternative, in their mind, is that CDC is "blamed" - which they do not want. Must protect CDC (an extension of the administration).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)


Response to ann--- (Reply #75)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:52 AM

103. Why public transportation only?

Why were all of exposed personnel not given the time off with pay and asked or even told to stay home?

Why is it all right for them to care for immune compromised patients but not travel on a bus?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #103)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:26 AM

110. It wasn't right for her to be caring for immune compromised patients.

But since that was her job, she had no choice, except to quit. She absolutely had a choice about boarding the plane.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MoonRiver (Reply #110)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:32 AM

113. Her superiors bear no responsibility for forcing her to work?

You seem far more outraged by the nurse's decisions than by those who supposedly know much more than her and absolutely wield far more power.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #113)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:51 AM

120. I am definitely NOT exonerating them.

They are the most responsible, but she bears some responsibility for her bad choices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MoonRiver (Reply #110)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:12 PM

198. She could have stayed home and been the person

ahead of you at the grocery store. Or maybe just used your cart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #103)


Response to ann--- (Reply #75)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:30 AM

136. You have completely missed the point of the OP. If Nurse Vinson was such a threat by

 

flying on commercial airlines, then why was she allowed to (nay, required to) continue working with uninfected patients?????

You don't get to have your cake and eat it too, not in the universe I and the OP inhabit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:08 AM

92. Good post, but it's stupidity all around.

I don't blame her too much because when an authority tells you it's ok, most people will set their own misgivings aside, in most situations. This is Sociology 101. So everything you said is true.

That said, the whole situation is stupid, starting with an unprepared hospital keeping an ebola patient and CDC not get experts there immediately and making sure the best precautions were taken; if they did, the points you raised should never even have come up. That woman should have had no doubt she couldn't make that flight once she had been exposed until the incubation period was past. For any further care once the risk was known, caregivers should have had the option and those who chose to help in the patient's care should have gotten bonuses for their additional risk, and the inconvenience of the restrictions through the incubation period. It is so friggin' basic.

And you know what? I'm NOT an ebola expert, or even a doctor or nurse. I work in IT. But I can figure this stuff out. And presumably the new "Ebola Czar" can also do that, without an MD after his name. The question is whether he has the management chops to move bullshit out of the way so that the needed hard core preventive /protective actions can be taken. And to deal with funding (Congress? oh gawd ...), because doing the right things are going to take $$$$. Hazard pay for caregivers isn't normally in hospital budgets, I suspect. Not at the ratio that could be needed here anyway. And what about the PPE? There may not even be enough in the manufacturing pipeline if this gets out of hand. Surely there isn't enough staged at the average hospital. (Which is one reason why in most cases patients should probably be moved to one of the few specialist centers for treatment.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:13 AM

93. In Ohio, where pay is low and cost of living is low,

nurses start at 44k or so, and get decent raises.

I can't imagine she gets paid less than 60k or so in Dallas, with experience. And if she had the time off work to take a vacation to visit family, she had the time to isolate herself for a few weeks. I would have skyped with my family for 'support', and bought travel insurance that would have paid out when I was unable to take my flight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #93)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:54 AM

104. She had recently moved to another state

That's expensive and most people don't do it unless they have to.

Employers move to Texas because it's a low wage non union state, Texas Presbyterian is a non union hospital.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #93)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:27 AM

135. Anyone who can take a vacation can afford to take a few weeks off? Really.

And you also expect workers to forego vacations to cover work related issues. Fuck that. If the government and or the employer want her "isolated" then they should pony up and not dump all responsibility on the wage earner. They should also have had her shut down as a worker but they didn't do that either.

Funny how "socialist" everyone gets when they want a worker to eat costs or give up earned benefits and thereby be "responsible" but the rich, companies, and the government are never responsible for shit.

Pure punching down and scapegoating here to cover and deflect from inept institutions and bean counters which is fucking pitiful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #135)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:36 AM

141. It's like the "reverse socialism' we saw during the Financial Crisis of 2008-09 when

 

all the risks were 'socialized,' but the rewards remained 'privatized.'

Here, the risks are 'socialized' onto the worker, while the rewards remain 'privatzied.'

USA! USA! USA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #135)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:02 PM

150. I expect my fellow licensed professionals

to take their responsibilities seriously, even if administration is full of screw-ups.

Not infecting your own family or potentially hundreds of other strangers on public transportation is not just 'work related issues'. There's plenty of blame to go around here, and her poor decisions are certainly part of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #150)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:23 PM

162. No, what you expect is for wage earners to eat it to cover screw ups by administrations

and call it responsibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #162)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:47 PM

174. If, by 'wage earners'

you mean professionals who are paid specifically to understand health issues and deal responsibly with them, then yes, I do hold them to a higher standard. Not to 'cover screw ups by administration' but simply to hold to the standard of 'first do no harm'. I don't give a rat's if all of the administrators get fired. That has nothing to do with the responsibilities that go along with having the licensing to be a healthcare worker. You shouldn't go into the field if you simply are going to say 'admin cleared it, so I'll do it'. You're expected to be a highly capable, critical thinking individual. Not a cog in a bureaucratic machine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #174)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:33 PM

190. What you expect is for working people to give up the fruits of their labor and/or earned benefits

to protect the interests of institutions, officials, and bureaucracies so that regardless of their ineptitude and instituted policies are never in a position to be on the firing line while hiding behind "professionalism" to focus blame always on workers and away from the real fuck ups that are handsomely rewarded in the exchange on the labor of the folks you want to eat all the downside.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 09:48 AM

101. That's the insidious nature of ebola...

It commandeers its host.

A sudden, rapacious urge to fly coach is the first clue that you're no longer running the show.



MUST. FLY. COACH.

TYY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeeYiYi (Reply #101)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 10:57 AM

122. lol :) n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:03 PM

151. absolutely, so sick of the blame the victim crap i see on other sites

anyone of us would have done the same

the only people saying otherwise seem to have a racist/political motive for saying so or else are very naive people who rarely travel and don't realize that travelers take risks to fly all the time because expensive air tickets have been nonrefundable for over a decade

they told her it was cool to fly & no way frontier was giving her the money back to use another time, we'd ALL do as she did

capitalism puts us in these places & then blames us for being where they put us

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pitohui (Reply #151)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:07 PM

154. You could say, "It's a feature, not a bug (npi)" - nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pitohui (Reply #151)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:13 PM

158. Other sites?

Read the thread, there's plenty of victim blaming right here.

Interestingly I haven't seen any pictures or video of nurse Vinson, do you suppose that has any effect on my thinking?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:10 PM

156. This may be the best thread I've read on DU since joining during

 

FergusonOctober.

Sincere compliments on framing the issue so clearly. Anyone arguing with you either needs reading comprehension or just doesn't care about working people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:11 PM

157. During the Polio Epidemic in the 50s only the families that actually had the disease were actually

quarantined. The rest of us took it upon ourselves to use that common sense you were talking about. When they actually had someone in the schools die then the school was closed by local official. I am sure that CDC was involved in some way - usually keeping tract of the stats etc. but we were never told that we were all quarantined. We took our own measures to stay safe.

If the polio epidemic had reached the level that ebola has in some of the African nations there might have been legal sanctions on everyone. We are no where near that level in the US.

I understand that the state of Texas has finally issued orders that people exposed are not supposed to travel. Common sense. I have no idea why this common sense is not being used in today's world. Especially by health care personnel who should be aware of the depth of the problem. It is not as if this has not been in the news since it got out of control in Africa.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #157)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 11:42 PM

206. I had polio ...

in Michigan none of what you claimed was true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GeorgeGist (Reply #206)

Sun Oct 19, 2014, 10:07 AM

213. Did you by any chance live in a city? I was in a rural area. That may have been the difference. As

to lying - I was tell it like it was in my own area of the country - NE IA. And it was very true. Tell us about your experience since it seems to have been different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:16 PM

159. The settings are not equal.

Within the hospital setting, she wore gloves and other protective gear, not only for her protection, but for her patients as well. Should she have experienced the sudden onset of symptoms while at work or even at home, she could have easily and quickly been placed in isolation.

On a plane, she isn't wearing any protective gear and should she experience the sudden onset of symptoms, she's not in a controlled hospital environment and cannot easily be isolated from the other passengers. Also, unlike the hospital setting, no one on the plane was aware of her exposure to Ebola or trained in its care. Had she become injured or incapacitated while symptomatic, those coming to her aid would not have donned protective gear as they would in a hospital setting.

The problem is the plane itself. It's not a hospital where you can just walk into the ER, or a car where you can just pull over and call for an ambulance and have medical personnel render aid and transport you to a hospital in a short amount of time. It's a plane that needs to make an unscheduled landing at an airport. And during the time when the pilot contacts the nearest airport, flies to it, descends and is cleared to land, the patient cannot be quickly and appropriately isolated from 100+ passengers and an untrained crew.

But it's a moot point because she cannot undo her decision and now those who have been exposed to Ebola cannot travel. Let's just hope that going forward, everyone is now more educated because of this incident and makes better common-sense decisions that benefit the greater good, whether another person tells them to or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sweet Freedom (Reply #159)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:25 PM

164. Would you be comfortable with being nursed by one of the Ebola exposed staff?

As liberal and scientific minded as I try to be I have to say that given a choice I'd rather not.

The upshot of this affair is that people will be more skeptical of authority, that's a good thing when you're talking about public health.

Or so I hear here on the DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #164)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:36 PM

199. Nope

I think this hospital should have assigned a very small group of personnel to care for Duncan only and then paid their salaries while they were safely quarantined afterwards. I really don't understand why they didn't and I think their management was reckless and irresponsible. The hospital did a horrible job protecting patients and employees and it's one of the reasons I think people need to think beyond themselves when directives seem questionable. I sincerely hope that many other facilities and caretakers now know what to do and have the courage and support to raise their voices when they question authority. And I hope that the mistakes already made do not result in any more cases.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sweet Freedom (Reply #159)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:13 PM

185. Well said!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:26 PM

165. If the nurse doesn't have symptoms, she is not contagious. Period.

We have been assured of that repeatedly.

So there is no reason why someone can't travel or do whatever they want - but they must stop the minute they experience symptoms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #165)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:56 PM

178. Exactly. If she was traveling and got Sx, stop. If she was working, got sx, stop. If she was at the

corner grocery store and got sx, stop.

That said, I would make sure that I was not somewhere I would want to be treated at during the (possible) incubation period in case I got sick. No traveling to out of the way places or places without health care facility I approve of. Just in case I got sick, needed to be treated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uppityperson (Reply #178)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:20 PM

187. And if she was on a cruise ship in the middle of the ocean?

I mean, this is ridiculous.
First of all, she isn't even clear when her symptoms appeared.
Second of all, there are many situations in which one can not just "stop" whatever it is they are doing the second symptoms appear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #187)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:22 PM

189. Did you read my post or just the title?

That said, I would make sure that I was not somewhere I would want to be treated at during the (possible) incubation period in case I got sick. No traveling to out of the way places or places without health care facility I approve of. Just in case I got sick, needed to be treated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uppityperson (Reply #178)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:30 PM

194. Indeed. And a cruise ship would not be a good place to be if symptoms did start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #165)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:21 PM

188. So if she is sitting on the plane at that time, how do you propose she "stopped."

I don't think jumping off the plane is an option.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #188)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:35 PM

195. I could be wrong, but I don't think the symptoms come on all of a sudden in a particular moment.

She would start to feel a little out of sorts, a headache perhaps, then symptoms would develop over a few hours. It would certainly take a good while before she would start to spew out of her orifices (thereby releasing the virus into the environment).

So a short flight (not overseas, for example) should be okay, if begun with no symptoms at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #195)

Sun Oct 19, 2014, 09:33 AM

209. Well, if you don't know the exact moment you get the symptoms, then how are you going to stop

the moment symptoms develop?
CDC realized they screwed up by not placing travel restrictions on the people exposed to Ebola.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 12:43 PM

170. Someone here posted hcw exposed should be fired for not making their own decisions . My reply

.http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5678836

and I rec this OP
Centuries can not change human nature
DFW witch hunt imo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 01:58 PM

192. Hhmmm...

" I'd really like to see my family and get some moral support after what I've been through lately. "And expose your family?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to donco (Reply #192)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 02:07 PM

193. I call that the definition of selfish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:43 PM

200. I'm a nurse and I took the Nightingale Pledge.

"I solemnly pledge myself before God and in the presence of this assembly, to pass my life in purity and to practice my profession faithfully. I will abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous, and will not take or knowingly administer any harmful drug. I will do all in my power to maintain and elevate the standard of my profession, and will hold in confidence all personal matters committed to my keeping and all family affairs coming to my knowledge in the practice of my calling. With loyalty will I endeavor to aid the physician, in his work, and devote myself to the welfare of those committed to my care."

I really want to go visit my family and not be stuck here alone with all this time off, and chances are, I won't get ebola, but as a nurse, I know the seriousness of ebola infection, and the importance of stopping it in it's tracks. If there's even a remote chance I might be infected with ebola, I wouldn't risk exposing others to it. For the good of all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:46 PM

201. Some evilDUers think lots of workers aren't actually people,

just pawns to pander to for political agendas sometimes but to patronize and judge all the time. Judging someone from the comfort and safety of our computers is why Al Gore created the Internet.

Yes, of course nurses have families and friends and need to get away from stressful situations just like anyone else. And most any rational human being knows how expensive it is to change/cancel travel tickets, and the value of purchasing them many months in advance. And pretty much everyone on the left does place a ton of trust in the authorities. Its the tea party that thinks the government is lying to you to destroy your life.

I think its selfish to not consider the nurse's perspective in this situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Original post)

Sat Oct 18, 2014, 07:42 PM

203. I am a working registered nurse as well working ing a hospital

And I couldn't believe my eyes when I read that nurse who flew are different states knowing full well my experience I just had with highly infected pt.
Where doesn't am applied by the lack pf occ common sense cone into play for your follow man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread