[HN Gopher] Report: 90% of nurses considering leaving the profes...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Report: 90% of nurses considering leaving the profession in the
       next year
        
       Author : dr_pardee
       Score  : 889 points
       Date   : 2022-04-27 14:54 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.healthcareitnews.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.healthcareitnews.com)
        
       | phil21 wrote:
       | While it's anecdote, every single peer in bedside medical care I
       | know without exception has either left the field, or has
       | immediate plans to as soon as student loan debt is repaid. The
       | few older medical professionals in my family are simply sticking
       | out the last few years until they can retire early.
       | 
       | This was generally the case prior to pandemic due to how poor the
       | work environment has become, but the pandemic seems to have
       | broken the few remaining folks who still had hopes and dreams.
       | 
       | How doctors of all professions lost their professional agency to
       | do-nothing administrators within a generation is quite puzzling
       | and a bit terrifying to me.
        
         | api wrote:
         | > lost their professional agency to do-nothing administrators
         | 
         | You just summarized the decline of Western civilization in one
         | phrase.
         | 
         | This has happened almost everywhere and efforts to push back
         | have proven extremely difficult. I personally place a lot of
         | the blame on the educational system for overproducing
         | administrative skill sets and underproducing practical skill
         | sets. There is some role for those things of course but we have
         | far too many people for the administrative roles we really need
         | and far too few for many other professions. This combined with
         | the tendency of people to recruit people like themselves has
         | oversaturated the market with administrators looking for
         | reasons to exist.
         | 
         | The rot is to the point that we have the spectacle of Elon Musk
         | looking like superman. Why does he look like superman? Because
         | he actually does things instead of having meetings to discuss
         | the meeting schedule. He's just a reasonably competent engineer
         | and business founder with huge resources who... does things...
         | and this makes him look superhuman by comparison to the hordes
         | of administrators that only discuss doing things and commission
         | studies about hypothetically doing things.
        
           | hedora wrote:
           | See also: California's plan to eliminate algebra 2 and
           | calculus from the highschool curriculum. It is being
           | spearheaded by someone without a math degree, in the name of
           | improving marketability of the kids for data science
           | positions, or something.
           | 
           | See also (2): Monty Python's bicycle repairman sketch.
        
             | tick_tock_tick wrote:
             | > in the name of improving marketability of the kids for
             | data science positions, or something.
             | 
             | They have been very clear and upfront about the goal. They
             | want to "solve" racial discrepancies in graduation rates so
             | they've taken the classes often failed and are removing
             | them.
        
             | api wrote:
             | Yeah that proposal is insane.
             | 
             | For a while now it feels like the left and the right are
             | attempting to one-down each other on how stupid they can
             | get. That proposal seems like an example of the left trying
             | to out-stupid Trump and the alt-right. Don't worry I'm sure
             | the right is working on things even dumber than this, and
             | then those will have to be topped, and so on. In 2024 we
             | will have Dr. Oz and Marjorie Taylor Greene running against
             | Oprah Winfrey and Kamala Harris.
             | 
             | I'm not sure how this downward spiral ties into the
             | administrative position over saturation problem, but I have
             | the intuition that it does somehow. Maybe what we have are
             | a whole ton of people who don't really know how to do
             | things who vote. Voting is ultimately a hiring decision, so
             | what we get is a voting process that hires a whole bunch of
             | either administrators who themselves don't know how to do
             | things or crackpots because people without practical
             | knowledge can't spot a crackpot.
        
               | selimthegrim wrote:
               | Oprah would actually not be the worst candidate -
               | certainly better than Michelle Obama.
        
               | api wrote:
               | https://slate.com/health-and-science/2018/01/oprah-
               | winfrey-h...
        
               | selimthegrim wrote:
               | My counters are
               | 
               | a) Forsyth County, GA in 1987
               | 
               | b) Michelle Obama's senior thesis at Princeton
        
               | hedora wrote:
               | I think the root problem is that administators without
               | practical skills are running everything.
               | 
               | Since they got by without any practical skills, they
               | don't value such things. Now, they want to eliminate them
               | entirely from the educational system.
               | 
               | The managers are at war with the individual contributors,
               | and they don't understand that someone has to actually do
               | work, or the system will collapse.
        
               | base698 wrote:
               | https://www.amazon.com/Managerial-Revolution-What-
               | Happening-...
               | 
               | > Burnham's claim was that capitalism was dead, but that
               | it was being replaced not by socialism, but a new
               | economic system he called "managerialism"; rule by
               | managers.
               | 
               | In 1941.
        
           | trasz wrote:
           | It's not about Western civilisation, it's about economic
           | neoliberalism, replacing every existing metric with a single
           | one: shareholders' profits. Those do-nothing administrators
           | _do_ have a marketable skill: they make money for the
           | company. Or at least appear to, according to (obviously
           | flawed) criteria that are being used to evaluate ones' work.
        
           | tristor wrote:
           | Pretty much. Unfortunately, we've also created a massive
           | underclass in the West who have effectively no applicable
           | skills. They can neither administrate, or do things, and so
           | they are effectively dead weight on society. Ironically,
           | considering that administrators are driving us over the
           | cliff, the underclass is less problematic than the
           | administrators. At some point we'll hit a critical mass and
           | there will be so few people left that know how to do things
           | that we literally will be unable to maintain the basic
           | infrastructure of civilization. The cracks are already
           | starting to show.
           | 
           | The sad thing is that this is so very obvious, and yet such
           | an intractable problem to solve. The entrenched systems at
           | every level of society will fight you at every turn when you
           | try to improve things.
        
             | stripline wrote:
             | I recently saw a good talk about this point.
             | 
             | Preventing the Collapse of Civilization.
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSRHeXYDLko
        
           | RyEgswuCsn wrote:
           | That is an interesting observation. I wonder how much of the
           | advent of "talking over doing" is related to the development
           | of mass/social media.
           | 
           | Influence can propagate so easily through mass media, meaning
           | that it is now possible to generate enough business interest
           | just through "hyping" (it's difficult to achieve this when
           | messages have limited reach) --- combined with the fact that
           | it is often cheaper and less risky to "talk" than to actually
           | "do", we end up with a culture where hyping is preferred
           | whenever possible.
        
         | bpodgursky wrote:
         | The shift to EMRs (more-or-less forced by the ACA) has been a
         | huge quality-of-life loss for doctors. Tons of time spent on
         | Epic or Cerner checking boxes and selecting drop-downs.
         | 
         | Turned a "trusted professional" advisory role into a keyboard
         | role.
        
           | notch656a wrote:
           | There are medical scribes who will do all that for the
           | physician and for dog-shit wages. Usually these are medical
           | school-wannabes so they can easily be tricked into working
           | for minimum wage, and once they're suitably trained the
           | physician just has to briefly scan the EMR for completeness
           | and sign off on it.
        
             | bpodgursky wrote:
             | I have not seen this happen extensively, in practice.
        
         | ryan93 wrote:
         | There are like 4 million nurses. Where are they going to go for
         | even remotely similar wages?
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | > How doctors of all professions lost their professional agency
         | to do-nothing administrators within a generation is quite
         | puzzling and a bit terrifying to me
         | 
         | This should terrify everyone. Large segments of our society are
         | failing us despite being stuffed to the gills with
         | administrative staff that don't contribute much to productivity
         | but rob professions of their independence. We're managing
         | ourselves to death.
        
         | csa wrote:
         | I frequently say that administrators have killed both the
         | education (esp. tertiary) and medical fields in the US.
         | 
         | I'm pretty sure both of these will implode under the
         | bureaucratic weight at some point -- the financial and social
         | costs of the excessive administrators is not justified by their
         | (often minimal or negative) value added.
        
           | throwawayboise wrote:
           | Yes, it's like someone held up a mirror when you look at what
           | has happened in Higher Ed when the professors stopped running
           | things, and Health Care when doctors stopped running things.
           | Costs skyrocketed, outcomes stagnated or declined,
           | satisfaction plummeted.
        
         | salt-thrower wrote:
         | > How doctors of all professions lost their professional agency
         | to do-nothing administrators within a generation is quite
         | puzzling
         | 
         | The profit model of the U.S. healthcare industry might have
         | something to do with it. The fact that hospitals are run like
         | businesses and have shareholders is insane to me. I know other
         | countries' healthcare systems got hit hard by the pandemic too,
         | but it seems like the uniquely capitalist nature of healthcare
         | in the U.S. sets it up to mistreat workers and cut corners for
         | the benefit of administrators and executives.
        
           | toiletfuneral wrote:
        
           | theklub wrote:
           | It's not just that, some hospitals are outsourcing everything
           | disenfranchising the people that work there. And I mean
           | everything from the doctors themselves to IT to the cleaning
           | lady to the food workers and selling the buildings to lease
           | them back. It's the fleecing of America.
        
           | reedjosh wrote:
           | If they can't throw some medication with pharma kickbacks at
           | you, they probably won't do much at all.
           | 
           | My 6 month old son was put on topical steroids for a small
           | rash on his back and the doctors solution when this turned
           | into a progressive issue was more and stronger topical
           | steroids.
           | 
           | Eventually I learned about topical steroid withdrawal, and
           | after a hellish withdrawal period, my son has no real skin
           | conditions.
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpW4VV2bsD8&t=28s
           | 
           | And yes, my son at ~1 year old was red and bleeding like that
           | head to toe.
           | 
           | When I brought up steroid withdrawal I was rudely dismissed
           | by multiple doctors including dermatologists.
           | 
           | Doctors currently have willful blinders on at a minimum, and
           | some may be a true embodiment of evil. I hope the whole for
           | profit medical system crashes and burns.
        
             | Enginerrrd wrote:
             | Steroids are so commonplace and old, I really doubt anyone
             | was getting pharma kickbacks in the case of your son.
             | 
             | There's just a large range in quality amongst doctors. What
             | you're calling "willful blinders" or "true embodiment of
             | evil" is more likely just a failure to adapt out of a
             | simple paradigm: {Inflammation}->{Treatment = steroids}.
             | And a failure to recognize when that was causing a loop.
             | Maybe they forgot about steroid withdrawal. In fact, as
             | someone with quite an interest in pharmacology and some
             | background as a paramedic, this is the first I've ever
             | heard of it, and I love obscure medication issues.
        
               | reedjosh wrote:
               | > Maybe they forgot about steroid withdrawal.
               | 
               | As I mentioned in my comment I mentioned steroid
               | withdrawal to many doctors when my son was literally only
               | sleeping an hour or so a night from itching and I was
               | dismissed out of hand.
               | 
               | If its not kickbacks, then its such a terrible arrogance
               | as to be evil.
               | 
               | How can a dermatologist not know of my son's condition?
               | Particularly seeing as steroids have been around for a
               | while as you've mentioned. Even when I brought the idea
               | to the dermatologist, after a bit of head nodding his
               | solution was another two weeks of a yet stronger steroid
               | to `calm it down`, and then to taper.
               | 
               | There's a nonprofit trying to get doctors to properly
               | acknowledge the condition.
               | 
               | https://www.itsan.org/
               | 
               | There's as I linked above about a million videos of
               | people recovering from TSW as well.
               | 
               | There's even a study out of Autstralia that followed 10
               | children with what was called bad eczema, but after a
               | withdrawal period every child at max had pruritis on
               | elbows or knees.
               | 
               | https://www.medicaljournals.se/acta/content_files/files/p
               | df/...
               | 
               | If my job were skin, and topical steroids was one of the
               | main things I used as a tool, how could I not know about
               | these issues? You'd have to be such a hack that nobody
               | would consider you a professional, yet the same
               | dermatologist that offered yet another round of steroids
               | had his office on the penthouse suite of a downtown
               | building with a showcase displaying awards.
               | 
               | It may seem hyperbolic to you, but you didn't live
               | through this like I did. You didn't see your young child
               | in complete misery due to medical authorities you thought
               | you could trust misguiding you. It's evil of some form.
        
               | hedora wrote:
               | I had some digestive issues, and the specialist's
               | diagnosis boiled down to: I have the same issue. You're
               | getting older.
               | 
               | The correct diagnosis was: That sounds like chronic
               | inflammation. Hit the gym and lose 20 lbs, fattie.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | bitsnbytes wrote:
           | profit model is not the issue. How the compensation and
           | rewards are structured is the issue.
        
             | defterGoose wrote:
             | So...we need to _manage_ that better?
        
         | orangepurple wrote:
         | > How doctors of all professions lost their professional agency
         | to do-nothing administrators within a generation is quite
         | puzzling and a bit terrifying to me.
         | 
         | I would bet it's caused by:
         | 
         | - stifling bureaucracy
         | 
         | - hostile legal climate
         | 
         | - massive start up costs
         | 
         | The only winning move is not to play. Let the system fall apart
         | and join on the later upswing. The unfortunate part is all the
         | needless suffering people will endure during this process.
        
         | brightball wrote:
         | Insurance companies.
         | 
         | Everything is controlled by insurance companies. You can't do
         | anything unless it's exactly how insurance wants and only for
         | what insurance will pay.
         | 
         | It limits everything, including how every profession can be
         | compensated simply because you can't easily hire somebody for
         | more than what insurance will pay for their services. You can,
         | but the funds have to come from somewhere.
        
           | slantedview wrote:
           | Insurance companies are awful and should not exist, sucking
           | up a lot of doctor time, but when it comes to nursing,
           | hospitals are particularly awful, cutting staffing levels to
           | the bone in order to maximize profit. People die as a result,
           | and nurses are burnt out.
        
           | mfer wrote:
           | In the book _The innovator 's prescription: a disruptive
           | solution for health care_ by Clayton Christenson, there are
           | some good analysis of where the complexity and problems come
           | from in the current US medical system.
           | 
           | A lot of it has to do with size and the complexity that goes
           | along with it. So, as hospitals get bigger, do more, and
           | increase in size and complexity these issues become worse.
           | 
           | The economics math even mirrors factories... a factory that
           | can build 100 things compared to one that just produces one
           | thing.
           | 
           | The book was enlightening, even though many of the time
           | frames called out in the book were wrong. Disrupting medicine
           | is a lot harder than something like technology.
        
             | mikkergp wrote:
             | I think this alludes to it, but it's one thing mentioned in
             | one of Atul Gawande's book is that in India they have
             | hospitals that focus on one thing:
             | 
             | https://www.businessinsider.com/inside-indias-no-frills-
             | hosp...
             | 
             | So like a 2000 bed hospital just for heart surgeries. Like
             | you're saying, the more a heart surgeon specializes, the
             | better they are at it and the cheaper they can do it.
             | Better Outcomes for less money.
        
               | 2143 wrote:
               | Yes there are hospitals in India that cater to a specific
               | aliment. For instance, eye hospitals, cancer centres,
               | hospitals that cater to pregnancy, childbirth and
               | neonatology etc.
               | 
               | > Like you're saying, the more a heart surgeon
               | specializes, the better they are at it and the cheaper
               | they can do it. Better Outcomes for less money.
               | 
               | Not necessarily.
               | 
               | 1. A heart surgeon is going to be doing heart surgery at
               | more or less the same frequency regardless of whether the
               | hospital they're at handles only heart patients or not.
               | Wouldn't they?
               | 
               | 2. I doubt if anybody here considers them cheap. Yes it's
               | probably cheaper than in the US, but still it's rather
               | expensive. But then again, since life is priceless, ...
        
               | mikkergp wrote:
               | At a 2000 bed facility though, you could specialize in
               | specific types of heart surgeries. At a general hospital
               | you're probably more likely to take on a wider variety of
               | heart procedures. It's not just experience, but
               | experience in specific procedures that can dictate
               | outcomes:
               | 
               | https://www.reuters.com/article/us-healthcare-quality-
               | surger...
               | 
               | Maybe cheap is the wrong term, but less expensive? I mean
               | $800 may be expensive but certainly it's better than
               | more?
        
           | lettergram wrote:
           | No one wants to hear the truth.
           | 
           | There's near-infinite demand for healthcare and a constrained
           | (mostly artificially) supply.
           | 
           | Insurance, people and government can't solve the problem of
           | the supply and demand by throwing money on it.
           | 
           | You either expand supply or remove demand. Given removing
           | demand is... not desirable. The only alternative to fix the
           | issue is remove regulation and expand supply. That's it.
           | 
           | Insurance makes the issue worse by increasing demand and in a
           | way limiting supply through requirements and procedures.
           | 
           | Government limits supply through regulation AND expands
           | demand by paying for procedures.
           | 
           | An approach is to deregulate, such as removing government
           | licensing, remove Medicare, etc.
           | 
           | Imo Prices would drop >95% within a 2-5 years (to India or
           | Mexico levels).
           | 
           | I worked in medical billing for a few years and the issues
           | are beyond obvious.
        
             | lefstathiou wrote:
             | I think there needs to be some new approach to how medical
             | services are being paid for. My 70yo father fell off a
             | ladder and drove himself to the hospital in Calhoun Georgia
             | (2 hours north of Atlanta, a small town) with a bruised eye
             | and a broken wrist. He got in late afternoon, left the next
             | day, and the bill to insurance (which of course they won't
             | pay) was $69,000... more than per capita income in the US.
             | The system is ridiculous.
             | 
             | In my opinion, healthcare has reached the state where the
             | people who receive the benefit are too far removed from the
             | people who pay for it and given there is no "victim" of
             | price gauging, the prices will just keep going up up and
             | way.
             | 
             | I defer to those wiser than me for the solution. I don't
             | like complaining without being constructive so here is my
             | ignorant pass at it. This will require a few key steps: 1)
             | Yes, we need more supply (by deregulating the profession)
             | 2) I personally think a more effective solution would be to
             | gradually eliminate insurance except for catastrophic risk
             | (like emergency medical care from a car accident). #2 will
             | shift responsibility to the individual and the system will
             | be capped at what they can charge based on the average
             | person's ability to pay for it (which is how it works in
             | many parts of the world).
        
               | ClumsyPilot wrote:
               | > Yes, we need more supply (by deregulating the
               | profession)
               | 
               | So it looks like software development? Are you
               | comfortable for your life to be in the hands of a rando
               | who just finished a 6-months bootcamp?
        
               | lefstathiou wrote:
               | I don't think it has to be binary. For situations that
               | are life threatening, I'll opt for a premium service and
               | for situations that are not, I may opt for an
               | alternative. I think almost anyone at our company can be
               | trained to reliably operate and interpret an x-ray
               | machine for the vast majority of use cases.
        
               | ClumsyPilot wrote:
               | 'For situations that are life threatening, I'll opt for a
               | premium service'
               | 
               | 1 - what does the 'non-premium', i.e. bottomn of the
               | barrel service look like, is that incompetent people
               | offering rock bottom prices (resulting in death?).
               | 
               | 2 - are you sure you can identify a life threatening
               | situation correctly? Because my father did not.
               | 
               | 3 - how do you know the 'premium' provider in question
               | results in better outcomes, rather than being the same
               | rubbish well presented in fancy packaging?
        
               | lettergram wrote:
               | > left the next day, and the bill to insurance (which of
               | course they won't pay) was $69,000
               | 
               | I agree with you and the quote above is because of
               | insurance. Medicare will pay 10% of that total and your
               | father would be charged 2-5%. If he has private insurance
               | you'll see something different, maybe 15% and your father
               | would be charged 3-6%. If he's going out of network could
               | be 100%. Hospitals / practices charge insane bills
               | because people pay just a small fraction typically. It
               | really impacts those without insurance or private
               | insurance the worst. It is insane.
               | 
               | This is why I have suggested deregulation, particularly
               | around licensing. It drives down the cost. Insurance may
               | cover doctor X, but if nurse Y can do it for 5% the
               | price... well use the nurse. All doctors would have to
               | reduce prices and insurance would have to raise the
               | coverage amount to compete. It's what is done elsewhere
               | in the world.
        
             | jodrellblank wrote:
             | > " _An approach is to deregulate, such as removing
             | government licensing, remove Medicare, etc._ "
             | 
             | This worked so well for Rosemary Kennedy when she could be
             | prescribed an ice pick lobotomy. And so well for Eben Byers
             | when his doctor prescribed him radioactive water, and he
             | drank so much his jaw rotted off. It works brilliantly for
             | this woman[1] and her cheap Turkish dentist work leaving
             | her in pain. And for, well all of this junk: https://en.wik
             | ipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unproven_and_disproven...
             | 
             | Deregulation is what we had when things were terrible.
             | Regulation and licensing is what we use to block the most
             | obvious junk 'treatments' and the worst con artists.
             | 
             | > " _Given removing demand is... not desirable._ "
             | 
             | Removing demand is enormously desirable. Regulate the shit
             | out of CocaCola, Marlboro, and all the other health
             | destroying parasites and their advertising, tax them,
             | rework town and city planning to remove driving as the
             | primary transport in life and all the associated exhaust
             | fumes, rework public schooling and rebuild trust in the
             | government and medics so people aren't anti-health-advice
             | on principle, rework employment so that employees have some
             | rights and aren't stressed out all the time with no sick
             | breaks. Rework medical access so people can see medical
             | professionals, and sickness can be caught and treated
             | early, which reduces demand on seeing much sicker people
             | later.
             | 
             | > " _Insurance makes the issue worse by increasing demand
             | and in a way limiting supply through requirements and
             | procedures._ "
             | 
             | Insurance makes the issue worse by driving up costs to
             | patients and at the same time driving down pay to medical
             | staff, by insurance taking as much as possible. Without
             | insurance, supply and demand could remain the same, medical
             | staff earn more, patients pay less, and services be more
             | efficient with less time wasted fighting insurance
             | companies and filling in insurance paperwork.
             | 
             | [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/northernireland/comments/ua9me
             | 9/eas...
        
             | mola wrote:
             | You should educate yourself about how most of the western
             | world manages to have a functioning semi social health care
             | system. US is broken because of this blind fantaic faith in
             | _free markets_ _deregulation_ simplifications.
             | 
             | The problem is a large swath of the population that believe
             | in all earnestly that squeezing profit is some magical tool
             | for a functioning economy.
             | 
             | Too bad US is so good at PR, this mind virus is wreaking
             | havoc all over the world.
        
               | lettergram wrote:
               | > You should educate yourself about how most of the
               | western world manages to have a functioning semi social
               | health care system. US is broken because of this blind
               | fantaic faith in free markets deregulation
               | simplifications
               | 
               | Most healthcare in the west is subsidized by the US. The
               | US market is far more lucrative, so companies do R&D and
               | make capital from the US. The US also subsidizes in terms
               | of both military and energy almost every western country.
               | Even then, Europe has a higher tax rate and on average is
               | far poorer.
               | 
               | I'm well educated on this subject and worked in this area
               | in the US and spent time in other countries. You have no
               | idea what you're taking about.
        
               | ClumsyPilot wrote:
               | "The US also subsidizes in terms of .. energy almost
               | every western country"
               | 
               | These claims are outrageous and totally unsubstantiated.
               | How does US subsidise energy of France or Japan?
               | 
               | "Most healthcare in the west is subsidized by the US."
               | "The US market is far more lucrative, so companies do R&D
               | and make capital from the US. "
               | 
               | You are subsidising the companies, not my healthcare. And
               | they pay out this money in dividends to shareholders. I
               | am sure they are very gratefull, maybe you should ask
               | them for a rebate.
               | 
               | Stop subsidising them and overpaying - do you think
               | healthcare costs in Europe will rise? If you do, I've got
               | a wager.
        
               | spaniard89277 wrote:
               | I would say that most western countries do have both
               | public and private healthcare. I did have private
               | insurance here in Spain and it's nothing like in the US,
               | as far as I can tell. Service was excelent and I didn't
               | felt everyone was stressed.
               | 
               | In france your public insurance allows you to walk in a
               | private clinic or hospital too, as a relative did and
               | they cover her post-cancer treatment better than in the
               | public hospital (by her account at least).
               | 
               | So yeah, "free market deregulation" may be an
               | oversimplification but you have a problem in the US
               | that's also far more than just being for-profit. We have
               | for-profit over here and it works.
               | 
               | And that includes private & public institution doing
               | medical R&D and selling their products to the national
               | health services and private clinics, like quite a bunch
               | of spanish companies do, for example. I say this becase
               | it weirdly pops as an argument when it's totally
               | unrelated, and it may be only a tiny fraction of the
               | total cost.
        
           | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
           | Have US hospitals ever had transparent pricing?
           | 
           | This seems like the root of the problem, and insurance seems
           | like what "fixes" that but causes tons of downstream unwanted
           | side-effects.
        
             | teeray wrote:
             | It's always astonishing how I can get a fully itemized vet
             | bill right after a visit and pay for it. Meanwhile going to
             | the hospital is like "well gee, let's submit to insurance,
             | see what they'll pay, we'll readjust prices and then come
             | back to you in a few months."
        
               | lostcolony wrote:
               | More than that, I can get an estimate upfront, that in
               | 100% of cases matches the bill unless they find something
               | additional they need to do, which they'll inform me of
               | and create a new total estimate for.
               | 
               | Of note, my vet insurance doesn't negotiate on my behalf;
               | they just pay X% afterwards. The price the provider
               | quotes for a given service is the price everyone gets
               | (probably; some of the smaller vets might modify it if
               | someone is low income and in need).
        
               | MiddleEndian wrote:
               | Months after my last real procedure in a hospital, even
               | after the insurance was settled, I could not get them to
               | tell me how much money I owed them. Even when I went in
               | person and told them "I want to pay you all of the money
               | right now" they just shrugged their shoulders and told me
               | they didn't know how much I owed them.
               | 
               | They just sent me a bunch of small bills in the mail one
               | at a time and had a text field online where I could
               | blindly pay them without indicating whether or not I had
               | completed my payments.
        
               | lostlogin wrote:
               | Makes you wonder how this works for them. How do they
               | know if they are in the black or the red if they can't
               | tell who owes what?
        
               | MiddleEndian wrote:
               | Fucking beats me (although this particular hospital seems
               | to be very disorganized). I will never understand why
               | anyone would make it difficult for me to give them money.
        
               | brightball wrote:
               | Yep. Seems ripe for fraud too.
        
               | MiddleEndian wrote:
               | I ended up getting sent to collections for $40-50 for
               | missing one of the bills. Never in my life have I not
               | wanted to pay a bill, but god forbid any large
               | organization just take my money and leave me alone.
        
             | lostcolony wrote:
             | Yes. Prior to insurance. Insurance is the reason prices
             | aren't transparent; insurance companies demanded discounts,
             | so providers raised their prices to then say "you're saving
             | X from list". But not every company had the same bargaining
             | power, and individuals had none, so the actual desirable
             | price to offer couldn't be made broadly available. With a
             | hidden price (so no shopping around), that is discounted at
             | wildly different rates (so no meaningful way for third
             | parties to track it), and a necessary service (so no just
             | avoiding it), in a private for profit industry, of course
             | it skyrockets.
             | 
             | Our options are either to mandate publicly available price
             | lists that are adhered to and hope the market pushes things
             | downwards, mandate prices, or socialize insurance (so that
             | the sole representative of everyone can negotiate the price
             | downwards using the leverage of the provider risking losing
             | most if not all their clients). Or, you know, keep doing
             | what we're doing which is working so well ( _/ sarcasm_).
        
           | caycep wrote:
           | Granted, there's a niche for cash pay docs. Example being
           | psychiatry - it's extremely hard to find a psychiatrist who
           | takes insurance, even Medicare. The good ones are all cash
           | pay...
        
           | micromacrofoot wrote:
           | I've heard the same thing from mental health counselors and
           | therapists. In wealthier areas many will just stop accepting
           | insurance entirely and make people pay out of pocket to avoid
           | all the insurance paperwork and requirements (some insurers
           | require specific diagnosis to continue paying for services).
           | If an insurer decides to not pay you? good luck. Now you need
           | to throw hours of unpaid labor at them to get money you're
           | owed.
           | 
           | Unsurprisingly, this means many normal people can't afford a
           | therapist and they're getting harder to find.
        
           | UncleOxidant wrote:
           | This. I had a great doc until a few years back. Best doc I've
           | ever had by a long ways. He'd spend a good amount of time
           | with you, actually listen to your concerns and even bring up
           | recent papers he'd seen on topics related to my health
           | issues. A few years ago he decided to mostly get out of
           | doctoring because he was tired of dealing with insurance
           | companies. For a while he went to a retainer model ($2K/year
           | up front, $250/visit) and cut the number of patients he was
           | seeing down significantly. I can't say as I blame him.
        
             | brightball wrote:
             | MDVIP does that model in the US too.
        
           | brimble wrote:
           | Consolidation's a big part of it. The last decade has seen
           | nearly all the small practices and offices in my city gobbled
           | up by a couple of huge companies. With that comes the MBAs
           | and the bureaucracy.
        
             | Workaccount2 wrote:
             | The healthcare in my area is like watching feudal lords
             | rapidly claiming their territory. With central fortresses
             | (hospitals) and outposts (smaller treatment centers).
        
           | cwbrandsma wrote:
           | The hospitals themselves are also to blame. There are a
           | couple court cases where the hospital threw the nurse under
           | the bus to cover up for their own issues (short staffing, bad
           | safety procedures, covering up for a doctor, etc), and nurses
           | are justifiably pissed off right now.
           | 
           | There was a time when hospitals could have helped the nurses
           | with the stress and workload, but the admins bungled it at
           | every possible turn, and now it seems they missed their
           | window.
        
           | polskibus wrote:
           | It's like that in many countries, also in EU. Average age of
           | a nurse is rising, richer countries rescue themselves by
           | importing workforce, because they can't find workers for the
           | rates they have budgeted at home.
           | 
           | It's is like that in other professions too if it's only the
           | tech that gets compensated well. There is a shortage of
           | skilled labour.
        
             | soco wrote:
             | Errata: there's a shortage of skilled labour _for these
             | working conditions_. Said budgeting is not set in stone,
             | and as long nurses and whatever else professions can vote
             | with their feet (by leaving the profession) no amount of
             | politics-led finger-pointing can replace a real-world
             | change in the healthcare policies.
        
           | ajross wrote:
           | > Everything is controlled by insurance companies. You can't
           | do anything unless it's exactly how insurance wants and only
           | for what insurance will pay.
           | 
           | Framed that way, this sounds terrible. But... the truth is
           | actual health care outcomes for insured patients in the USA
           | are _extremely good_. This holds in comparison to other
           | nations, when corrected for GDP and patient income, etc...
           | 
           | "Insurance companies" are, at least in the narrow sense,
           | doing what we pay them to do really well.
           | 
           | They may or may not be making things easier for nurses, which
           | is a different metric. But nurses aren't their customers, we
           | are. And we're getting a fairly good[1] product.
           | 
           | [1] Albeit extremely expensive relative to other nations.
        
           | belval wrote:
           | I doubt that it's as simple as that. Nurses are also leaving
           | in Canada and we don't have insurance breathing down their
           | neck.
        
             | icelancer wrote:
             | Insurance / government repayment is mostly the same thing.
             | A layer of bureaucracy.
        
             | tubalcain wrote:
             | Canada's solution will be to mass-import nurses from the
             | third world who will do twice as much work for half as much
             | money. Mark my words.
             | 
             | It's already happened with low-wage fast food jobs. Health
             | care is next. Nurses and doctors will be replaced by
             | poorly-trained third-world counterparts.
        
             | alexashka wrote:
             | Are they? Leaving to do what, exactly?
             | 
             | For every story of 'X leaves to do Y', there are a thousand
             | people claiming they'll leave, that never do.
        
               | belval wrote:
               | Some just leave to stay-at-home, some go back to school
               | and a lot will take early retirement.
        
               | klyrs wrote:
               | Instead, you're left with the diminished quality of care
               | from people who desperately want to leave but they're
               | only there because they can't afford to.
        
             | reedjosh wrote:
             | But they have zero autonomy there too I assume?
        
               | belval wrote:
               | Sample size of 1, but my gf blames forced overtime. Being
               | legally obliged to stay for an 8 hours shift after
               | finishing one has a way to drive you to depression.
        
               | px43 wrote:
               | I would pay more to go to a hospital where I know people
               | are actually well rested. My last few hospital stays have
               | been saturated with clearly agitated staff (doctors,
               | nurses, reception) who were putting in minimal effort,
               | and clearly didn't want to be there, and I can't blame
               | them given the conditions that they're being forced to
               | work under.
               | 
               | This is in the US, and I can't figure out why the
               | Department of Labor hasn't cracked down on the medical
               | industry yet. It's really horrific, especially because
               | these are the people we're supposed to be relying on to
               | keep us healthy and safe.
               | 
               | How hard is it to enforce 8 hour days 5 days a week?
               | Every other industry has figured it out.
        
               | belval wrote:
               | To be fair, most industries don't have evening and night
               | shifts and a supply mismatch, most nurses want to work
               | the day shift, it's harder to find candidates for evening
               | and night.
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | At least at my local hospital, it's not just overtime --
               | regular shifts are 12 hours even when everything is
               | normal. That's nuts.
        
           | syedkarim wrote:
           | Why doesn't the American Medical Association start its own
           | insurance company?
        
           | bitsnbytes wrote:
           | Insurance companies is a symptom of the REAL issue.
           | 
           | Unfortunately the American public hasn't figured out what the
           | real issue is yet. They reason why they haven't is mostly
           | because the Democrat party , Republican party, entertainment
           | industry , the Main Stream Media, tech industry, and the the
           | Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) has them occupied
           | with the symptoms of the REAL issue in order to keep them
           | chasing their tails.
           | 
           | The REAL ISSUE why healthcare isn't getting fixed is because
           | of Conflict of interest.The American public hasn't figured
           | out that going to congress who is riddled with conflict of
           | interest and who designed the existing system that we have in
           | place and is benefiting from it, might not be the best idea
           | to fix healthcare.
           | 
           | In fact the best thing to fix healthcare (and the other 99
           | problems)is to STFU about it and focus ONLY On reducing
           | conflict of interest in congress. Until we reduce conflict of
           | interest in congress nothing will be fixed.
           | 
           | The Democrat party ,republican party, CPD and MSM want you
           | focused on everything but reducing conflict of interest in
           | congress. In order to fix healthcare and any of the other
           | issues we must FIRST try to minimize conflict of interest by
           | implementing the following as a start:
           | 
           | 1. Term limits
           | 
           | 2. Closing or reducing revolving doors between private and
           | public sector.
           | 
           | 3. No private campaigning contributions. Use tech to overcome
           | the need of money.
           | 
           | 4. Reform lobbying by doing away with the money aspect of it
           | and utilizing technology to get your voice heard.
           | 
           | 5. Pay congress members more and better benefits, but in
           | return demand complete transparency from financial
           | information to limitations in investments , NCA , and make
           | pay and benefits tied to the general overall approval of
           | congress by the American tax payers.
           | 
           | 6.etc
           | 
           | Both party and the MSM solution to fix healthcare is the
           | equivalent of going to the MOB and asking them to fix crime
           | in your neighborhood which the MOB is benefiting from and is
           | promoting. It just makes no sense to talk solutions with
           | people riddled with conflict of interest.
           | 
           | You want to fix healthcare stop talking about healthcare and
           | get the individual republicans and individual democrats to
           | put their political ideology on hold and join forces to
           | demand that their party ONLY focuses on reducing conflict of
           | interest in congress.
        
           | darkerside wrote:
           | I don't hear it talked about enough, but I think the biggest
           | problem with insurance is that their profits are pinned to
           | how much they spend on medical costs.
           | 
           | https://www.verywellhealth.com/health-insurance-companies-
           | un....
           | 
           | In theory, this sounds like a great way to make sure
           | insurance companies aren't just taking unreasonable profits,
           | and that they are spending money on medical care, not
           | administration, keeping the business lean.
           | 
           | In _practice_, what it means is that profits are constrained
           | by medical costs, so the insurance companies are literally
           | incentivized to pay _more_ for medical services. Originally,
           | insurance companies were supposed to be an intelligent
           | negotiator on behalf of their customers. After all, their
           | experts should know much more than a layperson every will.
           | 
           | But with the poisoned incentive to raise costs, customers are
           | basically held hostage by a bag faith negotiator. Not bad
           | faith as in malicious, but in terms of having an enormous
           | conflict of interest.
        
           | legitster wrote:
           | I've worked with both, and by far hospitals are much, much
           | worse actors.
           | 
           | Hospitals are _legally enforced_ local monopolies (look up
           | Certificates of Need). Meanwhile, you might have a dozen
           | choices of insurance companies, but they all suck because
           | they have to take what the hospital billing departments give
           | them and take the blame or risk being dumped by the hospital.
        
           | at_a_remove wrote:
           | Previously, that wasn't entirely true.
           | 
           | In the very early nineties, insurance companies lured doctors
           | in with promises of referral if they would just accept
           | certain terms. Originally, this was to the benefit of the
           | doctor -- more referrals. But only originally: once lock-in
           | occurred, the insurance companies began to set their own
           | terms. They couldn't have accomplished this without some
           | greed on the part of many doctors early on.
        
           | Melatonic wrote:
           | Offer to pay in cash and it is amazing how much better the
           | customer service and general demeanour is from a medical
           | office - it always blows me away. They must REALLY hate
           | dealing all of the insurance BS.
           | 
           | I had not done an eye appointment in years and years because
           | my vision is generally very good - I went in expecting to
           | offer cash, negotiate, and generally play a bit of hardball.
           | I was amazed when the front desk person IMMEDIATELY perked
           | up, looked super happy, and started offering massive
           | discounts before I even threw numbers out. The eye doctors as
           | well were very enthusiastic.
        
           | bakuninsbart wrote:
           | It is definetely a (big) part of the reason, but if it was
           | the only one, things wouldn't be in a similarly terrible
           | situation in other countries. Take the UK as an example which
           | has a single-payer system, and morale is overall really low,
           | too, and nursing isn't an enticing career. (On a side-note,
           | the BBC show "This is going to hurt" is quite good and on
           | topic)
           | 
           | Apart from administrators and insurers, I think a large
           | problem is that the job has become substantially more
           | difficult and technology intense, while support and pay
           | hasn't kept pace. At the same time, liability is more serious
           | these days, which I don't think is a bad thing, but certainly
           | sucks for the workers who have to constantly justify
           | themselves and can get crucified for mistakes.
        
             | seabrookmx wrote:
             | +1 very similar story in Canada.
             | 
             | It blows my mind that super long shifts are the norm for a
             | job that's generally more exerting/stressful than your
             | average 9-5. But it's a viscious cycle now because of the
             | shortages of qualified staff.
             | 
             | Here in BC we have a full on crisis where family doctors
             | are retiring at an alarming rate and not being replaced.
        
           | andrei_says_ wrote:
           | Prioritizing profit corrupts the commitment to providing
           | care.
           | 
           | Healthcare can be either care or industry.
           | 
           | Applying corporate values to a healthcare system leads to
           | maximum wealth extraction from both providers and patients.
           | 
           | In this context innovation focuses not on the care part but
           | on the extraction. The care is secondary.
           | 
           | How can anyone who cares be a proponent or coexist with a
           | healthcare industry?
        
           | DaltonCoffee wrote:
           | This inefficiency and it's resulting poor working conditions
           | aren't unique to countries with health insurance and private
           | healthcare tho, see Canada.
        
           | rootusrootus wrote:
           | > You can't do anything unless it's exactly how insurance
           | wants and only for what insurance will pay.
           | 
           | This is the part that makes the whole experience so sadly
           | ridiculous. Nobody could ever tell patients what something
           | might cost and let them make choices, it was (and is) "Sign
           | here to acknowledge you'll ultimately be responsible for all
           | charges, no matter what they turn out to be." But the
           | insurance company doesn't operate like that, they say "Want
           | to be part of our network? Guess what, you have to ask us for
           | permission or we just won't pay you."
           | 
           | We need to rip off the bandaid, as it were, and reboot the
           | damn system. Pick one of any number of good examples from
           | other modern industrialized nations that have functioning
           | healthcare, and copy it. Yes, everything will be a zoo for a
           | while. We'll survive, and maybe even come out the other side
           | with a better system. And maybe some bankrupt insurance
           | companies, let me find my handkerchief.
        
           | pc86 wrote:
           | Insurance is the only industry where they agree to pay for
           | something (in this case, "medical care"), but then _after
           | service has been rendered_ can decide to pay less, or not pay
           | at all, or stop paying that provider altogether, etc. This
           | combined with hospitals being run by non-physicians*, and
           | people thinking being able to Google and read WebMD qualifies
           | them to argue with their doctor about treatment plans**,
           | healthcare in the US is going to absolute shit***.
           | 
           | * I strongly believe that only physicians should be running
           | hospitals. Certainly not administrators whose only education
           | is an MHA and only experience is working for for-profit
           | health companies. Medical decisions need to be made outside
           | of cost considerations. The only factors should be medical
           | science, quality of life, and patient wishes (in that order).
           | 
           | ** In stark contrast to asking questions and trying to
           | understand. But I have family members who are the "look
           | everything up and then try to tell my doctor how they're
           | going to treat me" ilk and it's crazy.
           | 
           | *** I don't think the above points are unique to US
           | healthcare other than cost considerations, but that's all I
           | have experience with.*
        
             | giraffe_lady wrote:
             | The "only physicians should run hospitals" doesn't make
             | that much sense to me. Reminds of the technocratic argument
             | you used to see a lot on the internet that instead of
             | politicians we should have scientists and engineers in
             | legislature.
             | 
             | The issue is if you have someone with a scientific
             | background doing politics, what you have at the end is
             | still a politician. Same thing here. An MD doing hospital
             | administration is an administrator.
             | 
             | Which is _not_ to devalue specialist expertise in these
             | roles. I definitely think you want people with these
             | backgrounds in those roles as well. Just not necessarily
             | exclusively. A career administrator has different skills
             | than a physician, you want people with both, and other,
             | roles working to run a hospital.
             | 
             | The real problem as I see it is probably the incentives,
             | constraints, and pressures they work under, or towards. A
             | physician forced to run a for-profit hospital maximizing
             | returns is going to make a lot of the same decisions as
             | someone with a business background in the same situation.
             | The thing is to change the situation, not put different
             | people into that role and expect them to do it dramatically
             | better.
        
               | caycep wrote:
               | The problem with this is that the MBA programs that churn
               | out hospital administrators tend not to be very
               | good...focus on mergers, cost cutting, not so much on
               | optimizing care. The pendulum has swung too much onto the
               | MBA for MBA's sake hospital administrators and less so on
               | actual medicine.
        
               | slantedview wrote:
               | > A physician forced to run a for-profit hospital
               | maximizing returns is going to make a lot of the same
               | decisions as someone with a business background in the
               | same situation.
               | 
               | Indeed! Whereas a doctor might say yes, give that patient
               | with cancer the treatment they need, the MBA is going to
               | say no, it costs to much, let them die. If the goal is to
               | maximize profit, the MBA is doing a better job. If the
               | goal is to maximize the health of your patients, the
               | doctor is. We must realize that these two goals are
               | fundamentally in conflict with one another.
               | 
               | The question isn't whether a doctor or an MBA should be
               | running a for profit hospital, it's whether we should
               | even have for profit hospitals. If we care about people
               | more than profits, then clearly we should not.
        
               | brianwawok wrote:
               | At some point, you have to put a value on a human life.
               | 
               | It sucks and no one likes it, but what is the
               | alternative?
               | 
               | Each human life is worth infinity? So we should bankrupt
               | the entire country, spending 10 trillion dollars on a
               | surgery that has a 1% chance to save a 98 year olds life?
               | 
               | Obviously that is an extreme example.. but the point is
               | sound. We only have so many resources, how do they get
               | divided up? Should be spend millions to give 80 year olds
               | 1 more year of life? Do we value life on the reverse of
               | age, so a baby we value at 10 million dollars, but a 90
               | year old we value at $20,000? What if that 90 year old is
               | your Grandpa?
        
               | slantedview wrote:
               | > So we should bankrupt the entire country, spending 10
               | trillion dollars on a surgery that has a 1% chance to
               | save a 98 year olds life?
               | 
               | This is a pretty wild straw man fallacy, but I'd like to
               | give a good faith response nonetheless.
               | 
               | You may not know, but the US spends more per capita on
               | healthcare than any other country in the world, by a
               | longshot. Many other countries provide unimpeded
               | treatment for all of their patients. If a doctor in Japan
               | wants chemo, the patient gets chemo, and treatment starts
               | immediately. So how does it make sense that we spend more
               | on our patients but doctors are still told no, the
               | patient can't have that treatment? It's because a larger
               | share of our biggest-in-the-world healthcare spending
               | goes to for profit companies, like insurance companies,
               | than anywhere in the world.
               | 
               | So when an insurance company says no to a treatment, it's
               | not because we don't collectively spend enough for that
               | treatment, we do! It's just that the insurance company
               | wants that spending for themselves.
        
               | calvinmorrison wrote:
               | Let's not be obtuse though. The majority of healthcare
               | costs are incurred at end of life. Perhaps insurers and
               | the government should not subsidize any life saving care
               | for those over the average mortality.
               | 
               | I know for example, my grandmother who lived in europe
               | many years ago, had failing kidneys. While today it's
               | likely she could have subsisted for more years on
               | dialysis, perhaps that money didn't need to be spent.
               | 
               | Life is finite, and racking up bills at EOL is a waste.
               | People need to learn how let others die with grace,
               | instead of giving chest compressions to a 85 year old
               | 80lb grandmother.
        
               | ClumsyPilot wrote:
               | If you want to do that, then you have to legalise
               | euthenasia and dace all the thorny questions that comes
               | with
        
               | nickff wrote:
               | > _" This is a pretty wild straw man fallacy, but I'd
               | like to give a good faith response nonetheless."_
               | 
               | Your interlocutor was actually using "reductio ad
               | absurdum", which is a valid style of argumentation.
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
               | 
               | You didn't address the scenario as presented, or
               | demonstrate how it violated a principle you had
               | described. Instead, you shifted to excoriating the
               | insurers for greed and waste.
               | 
               | Should the insurance company bankrupt itself on the first
               | client? If not, how should they decide how much to spend
               | on each? I should note that non-profit hospitals have
               | similar results as for-profit hospitals (in the USA), so
               | there's little evidence of shareholder greed playing a
               | significant role (though there are many other
               | stakeholders including employees).
        
               | JackFr wrote:
               | I would recommend the following EconTalk podcast on the
               | history of the American healthcare system.
               | 
               | https://www.econtalk.org/christy-ford-chapin-on-the-
               | evolutio...
               | 
               | Spoiler alert -- the author being interviewed doesn't
               | have a solution, quick, easy or otherwise. But the
               | history is fascinating -- in the end there are a lot
               | fewer villians than you might imagine. A lot of good
               | faith decisions seemingly made in the public interest
               | over the past 150 years have led us into a weird local
               | minimum that seems inescapable. Where we are was not
               | inevitable, and as they say if something is unsustainable
               | it has to end eventually, but before suggesting sweeping
               | solutions I'd recommend hearing a detailed history.
        
               | status_quo69 wrote:
               | We already have decent (not always great but decent
               | enough) government provided healthcare for the elderly
               | through Medicare. So in fact, we've completely avoided
               | your example already and said "yep, all life has value if
               | you're eligible for medicare".
               | 
               | Of course resources are finite, nobody ever argues that
               | they're infinite. But we treat healthcare as if there's a
               | constant scarcity of medicine with how much is charged
               | because there's a constant urge to squeeze even more
               | profits out of patients who probably have only 2 choices-
               | pay for the medicine or die.
        
               | zip1234 wrote:
               | The counterpoint is that you have the exact same
               | decisions being made in systems like the UK. People get
               | refused cancer treatment because they were too old and
               | their were younger patients that had a better prognosis.
               | The fact is both types of systems don't have unlimited
               | resources.
        
               | slantedview wrote:
               | Yes, care rationing is a thing. But in the UK care is
               | rationed due to capacity constraints whereas in the US
               | it's rationed in order to make a profit. These are very,
               | very different things. It means that people's welfare,
               | and death, is being traded for profit.
        
               | woah wrote:
               | Works pretty well for lawyers. It's not perfect, but
               | lawyers have to adhere to a code of legal ethics, and
               | only lawyers can have equity in law firms. Seems like
               | this model could be transferred directly to the medical
               | industry. It would not solve every problem ever, but it
               | is an interesting thing to look into.
        
               | JackFr wrote:
               | There might be a parallel to a medical group or a
               | professional corporation, but a law firm is a vastly
               | simpler operation than a hospital. Orders of magnitude
               | simpler.
        
               | giraffe_lady wrote:
               | Yeah that sounds fine too if you can do it. Anything that
               | prevents hospitals from being operated by large profit-
               | seeking entities with no other stake in them would
               | probably be a strict improvement over the current system.
               | 
               | I think the practical issue is those fields that have
               | similar restrictions basically predate a major societal
               | shift. We now consider the only valid limits on profit
               | and ambition to be market forces. I'm not sure
               | restricting hospitals in this way is less radical than
               | just nationalizing them, in terms of practical politics.
               | 
               | Anyway, again, sure. I'm not informed enough on this
               | subject to know what model would actually work best. I
               | think the problem is the raw exclusive profit motive
               | rather than who specifically is running them, but there
               | are a lot of ways to eliminate that.
        
             | legitster wrote:
             | > after service has been rendered can decide to pay less,
             | or not pay at all, or stop paying that provider altogether,
             | etc
             | 
             | This actually isn't necessarily true when you learn how
             | billing codes work. Most insurance companies pay out at a
             | fixed rate per billing code based on your plan. That
             | doesn't change. What does change is that hospitals can
             | retroactively apply new additional billing codes.
             | 
             | This happened to us once for an ER visit where we got 3
             | additional surprise bills over 6 months because the
             | hospital retroactively applied new billing codes to our
             | visit.
        
             | JackFr wrote:
             | > * I strongly believe that only physicians should be
             | running hospitals. Certainly not administrators whose only
             | education is an MHA and only experience is working for for-
             | profit health companies.
             | 
             | The skills need to run a hospital are quite different than
             | those required to be a doctor. I'm not saying hospitals
             | aren't unique - I believe they are and their adminstration
             | is highly specialized. Doctors should inform the
             | administration at every level but it would be a waste of
             | their training and a bad idea for doctors to run
             | everything.
             | 
             | > Medical decisions need to be made outside of cost
             | considerations. The only factors should be medical science,
             | quality of life, and patient wishes (in that order).
             | 
             | Would you be as quick to say "Doctors should work without
             | pay." ?
        
               | DocTomoe wrote:
               | > The skills need to run a hospital are quite different
               | than those required to be a doctor.
               | 
               | And still, in many countries, including highly
               | industrialized ones, hospitals are run by doctors. So
               | either US administrators are making their hospitals run a
               | lot better (which does not seem to be the case), or the
               | core incentives each group optimizes for are different.
        
               | cmorgan31 wrote:
               | Why would not paying doctors be the natural consequence?
               | It's a fairly significant jump to go from don't let cost
               | be a primary decision driver to let's force doctors to
               | work without pay.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | Because in reality, there are always tradeoffs and
               | constraints. In the US, a disproportionate amount of
               | healthcare costs come at the very, very end of life.
               | 
               | It's possible to meet the sole criteria of science,
               | quality, and patient wishes with exploding costs. I think
               | the OP's point was that money has to come from somewhere.
        
               | zeruch wrote:
               | "a disproportionate amount of healthcare costs come at
               | the very, very end of life."
               | 
               | One might ask why that is; while some is surely due to
               | natural decline in later years, one could likely also
               | posit that the cost-fears leading up through that period
               | (decades), and the general inability to get people to do
               | preventative care throughout adulthood contribute to that
               | significantly.
        
               | _jal wrote:
               | > One might ask why that is
               | 
               | Indeed.
               | 
               | It is one consequence of a highly atomized culture. I
               | suspect it happens because individuals are expected to
               | take responsibility for their care (basically, this is
               | the human side of cost-shifting and corporate planning
               | around the care gradient available to someone at a given
               | wealth level).
               | 
               | To someone at the end of their life, money is usually
               | less interesting to them than a few more days of
               | breathing. So the market provides.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | The explanation I've heard is that it's rooted in the
               | cultural sanctity of life and how that translates to
               | trying to preserve life at any costs (even when quality
               | of life is no longer present).
               | 
               | To be clear, I'm talking about the absolute twilight of
               | one's life that's reached regardless of levels of
               | preventative care. I think there's potentially an
               | opposite point that could be made: taking care of one's
               | self can prolong this period and make it cost more.
               | Someone who drops dead of a heart attack one afternoon
               | won't have the same end-of-life costs as someone who
               | gradually becomes enfeebled with age.
        
               | ClumsyPilot wrote:
               | > The skills need to run a hospital are quite different
               | than those required to be a doctor.
               | 
               | Why do you think law firms and accountancies are
               | partnerships? Because the best proffesional for managing
               | lawyers/accountants/develipers is such a proffeshional
               | with loads of experience. Thats why we have progression,
               | you gain management skill as you bevome more senior but
               | you still know how the industry works and the people you
               | manage
        
               | scarface74 wrote:
               | That's the definition of the "Peter Principle". Just
               | because you are good at your profession doesn't mean that
               | you are good at management.
        
               | ClumsyPilot wrote:
               | Is it impissible to select those who are good at
               | management from the pool of thousands of people who are
               | good at that proffeshion?
        
               | scarface74 wrote:
               | No, you first find people who want to go into management,
               | then you give them management responsibilities without
               | promoting them until they prove they can handle it.
        
               | towaway15463 wrote:
               | It should still be doctors. Just makes administration a
               | career path that a doctor can choose to move into. There
               | would be plenty of takers from the ranks of those burnt
               | out on patient care. They could even find new meaning in
               | being able to help people without going through the
               | bedside wringer. If professional administrators have a
               | place in the system it's in positions under experienced
               | physicians where they can help with implementation of
               | policy, not shape it.
        
               | Spooky23 wrote:
               | Doctor pay is high because supply is constrained.
               | 
               | We're "fixing" this by flooding the market with less
               | trained nurse practitioners and PE. Doctors are being
               | gobbled up by regional medical cartels and put where they
               | can maximize billing.
        
               | ejb999 wrote:
               | >>We're "fixing" this by flooding the market with less
               | trained nurse practitioners and PE.
               | 
               | In reality though, the overwhelming majority of cases
               | that walk into a doctors office on any given day do not
               | require an actual MD - NP and PA's are more than capable
               | of handling many, many things that a typical patient
               | needs.
               | 
               | Everybody tends to think they need a 'real doctor', they
               | usually don't. Its good they are there when they are
               | really needed, but do you really need an MD to diagnose a
               | sore throat, adjust your BP meds or many other routine
               | things that are people are seen for everyday?
        
               | Spooky23 wrote:
               | True, but which ones?
        
             | scarface74 wrote:
             | Opposite anecdote: For done reason about 10 years ago my
             | asthma that had just been a minor nuisance and didn't stop
             | me from running, teaching fitness classes part time, etc.
             | for a decade, sent me to the hospital and kept me coughing
             | for nearly a year.
             | 
             | The doctors and specialists gave me every treatment under
             | the son to no avail.
             | 
             | Then I did my own research and read I should try OTC
             | psuedophredrine. It worked like a charm. Now every time I
             | catch a cold (and when I got Covid), I pop psuedophredrine
             | for a few days and I am good.
             | 
             | Yes, psuedophredrine is suggested to treat Covid if you
             | have virus induced asthma.
             | 
             | Second anecdote: I have relatively mild cerebral palsy. As
             | I've gotten older, my affected foot tightens up especially
             | in the winter. My neurologist said it was physical and not
             | neurological. I went on vacation and was drinking more
             | alcohol than I usual do. I noticed I was walking without
             | pain. I did my research when I got home and found a
             | prescription muscle relaxant with the fewest side effects
             | and ask my doctor about it. He prescribed it to me.
             | 
             | He didn't bother telling me that I should get blood work
             | done to check for liver problems. I had to bring it up to
             | him.
             | 
             | I can now walk without pain and run when properly
             | conditioned.
        
             | umvi wrote:
             | > * I strongly believe that only physicians should be
             | running hospitals.
             | 
             | Strong disagree. This same attitude pervades the military
             | ("only pilots should run the air force") and really all it
             | does is that lower representation of the interests of the
             | other non-pilot 90% of your organization and put a pilot
             | bias on every decision being made.
        
               | advael wrote:
               | Those are extremely different situations and you've not
               | really justified why they're being compared. A "doctor
               | bias" in every decision being made would ideally
               | prioritize health outcomes over decisions made for profit
               | or convenience. It's possible that doctors will make poor
               | decisions too, but on balance our expectation based on
               | their training is that decisions made because of
               | healthcare outcomes would be more likely in this scenario
               | than the current state of affairs, which prioritizes
               | economic considerations as administrators in every
               | context currently tend to
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | I think the point is that "doctor bias" will not take a
               | balanced approach to the other systemic factors. I'd
               | argue it's the same with the pilots. If you asked pilots,
               | they'd likely say the same thing: their priorities are
               | going to align with the mission better than anyone
               | else's.
               | 
               | Anecdotally, this has been true in my experience on
               | complex engineering projects. When the project manager is
               | a mechanical engineer, guess which systems get the most
               | time, money, and priority? Mechanical. And when it's an
               | electrical engineer, the electrical system gets the
               | priority. When it's a software engineer, the software
               | etc. They all recognize the other systems, but
               | availability bias skews their worldview and priorities to
               | the neglect of others.
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | > insurance is the only industry where they agree to pay
             | for something (in this case, "medical care"), but then
             | after service has been rendered can decide to pay less
             | 
             | That's not always the case. The reason I stopped writing
             | mobile applications long ago was because the mobile
             | carriers were doing exactly this, and not even providing
             | enough paperwork for you to argue with them about it.
             | 
             | People like to lambast the Apple App Store for being
             | greedy, but the fact of the matter is that people netted 3x
             | as much off Apple that they did from the carriers. They are
             | asking too much money _now_ but their rates were absolutely
             | defensible at the time. It 's not a coincidence that we had
             | a gold rush that started almost exactly when the App Store
             | became a viable target.
             | 
             | One might ask what would happen if we joined the rest of
             | the 1st World in providing medical care and marginalized
             | private health insurance. Would it be a similar watershed
             | moment?
        
               | towaway15463 wrote:
               | The only gold rush in medicine where I'm from involves
               | moving to the US to get away from a nationalized health
               | care system.
        
               | ejb999 wrote:
               | curious - where is that?
        
             | slantedview wrote:
             | > I strongly believe that only physicians should be running
             | hospitals.
             | 
             | More than that - hands on healthcare should not be a for
             | profit industry. The need to make profit is fundamentally
             | opposed to providing the best care. As the push for profit
             | increases, more people get sick and die. This goes for long
             | term care as well, which is facing a similar staffing
             | crisis for similar reasons.
        
               | legitster wrote:
               | Your local hospital is likely a non-profit. Your health
               | insurance company might even be a non-profit. But they
               | don't do any better. Corporate profit motive doesn't seem
               | to be at play here.
        
               | candiddevmike wrote:
               | It's executive/board/administrative compensation that's
               | more of a problem than profits for most
               | hospitals/insurance companies.
        
             | scythe wrote:
             | >Medical decisions need to be made outside of cost
             | considerations.
             | 
             | It's really jarring to read an otherwise reasonable comment
             | that drops a whopper like this. _Nothing_ exists outside of
             | cost considerations. The NSA has cost considerations. The
             | Space Shuttle had cost considerations (obviously, not great
             | ones!). The design of nuclear submarines involves cost
             | considerations, however unsettling that may seem. You 're
             | telling me that my broken hand needs to be judged _outside
             | of cost considerations_? Give me a break.
             | 
             | The problem is that there is a lack of "trustworthy"
             | parties to evaluate cost expectations in medicine. The
             | patient often doesn't understand their condition _or_ its
             | treatments, the doctor has a clear perverse incentive to
             | inflate costs, and the insurance company may actually be
             | _better off_ if the patient _dies_. At least that 's the
             | conventional picture. Leftist pundits often complain that
             | the American economy is based on "greed", but a more
             | precise criticism is that there has recently been a trend
             | away from expecting benevolence and for-its-own-sake
             | honesty from anyone under any circumstances, or
             | equivalently an increasing cynicism about human
             | motivations. It remains to be seen whether a medical system
             | can function when nobody expects to trust anyone.
        
               | inglor_cz wrote:
               | "The Space Shuttle had cost considerations (obviously,
               | not great ones!)."
               | 
               | It absolutely did, and great ones too. The program was
               | too costly and never lived up to the original
               | expectations of fast and easy access to orbit.
               | 
               | Falcon 9 + Dragon is the first American human-rated
               | launcher and ship that can be labeled as somewhat cost
               | effective.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | ipaddr wrote:
             | * In this day and age not being your own doctor/advocate
             | will produce unwanted unnecessary results.
             | 
             | If you look up possible treatments /side effects and your
             | personal history you will be in a better position to engage
             | and weight options. If you blindly accept everything you
             | will end up on the most profitable treatment plan plan
             | insurance allowed.
        
             | bumby wrote:
             | > _I strongly believe that only physicians should be
             | running hospitals._
             | 
             | Can you elaborate on your rationale? I ask because I've
             | worked in hospitals run by a cadre of physicians and it was
             | not run well. Anecdotal, obviously, so I'm curious on your
             | thoughts on what they provide.
             | 
             | My worry is that it can lead to an unbalanced technocracy.
             | It's like saying a politician needs to come from [industry
             | x] to govern [industry x]. Technical competence is a
             | necessary, but insufficient criteria when managing a
             | multifaceted problem. The risk is that the front-line
             | physician priorities would always become the organization's
             | top priority. In reality, a hospital administrator has to
             | manage competing priorities across many different domains.
        
             | adolph wrote:
             | > Medical decisions need to be made outside of cost
             | considerations.
             | 
             | A common attitude which may cause:
             | 
             |  _Health care is extremely costly in the United States.
             | Although the rate of growth in spending has attenuated in
             | recent years, per capita spending on health care is
             | estimated to be 50 to 200 percent greater in the United
             | States than in other economically developed countries.
             | Despite leading the world in costs, however, the United
             | States ranks twenty-sixth in the world for life expectancy
             | and ranks poorly on other indicators of quality._
             | 
             | https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/complex-
             | relatio...
        
               | inglor_cz wrote:
               | Looking at the levels of obesity in the U.S., I consider
               | the 26th place a true miracle of American medicine. If it
               | can prevent people who devastate their bodies with junk
               | food for decades from dying at 50 ...
               | 
               | On the other hand, imagine the world where Coca-Cola
               | makes billions on healthy drinks, people are slim and fit
               | until they die, and half of the money spent on treatment
               | of chronic diseases of excess can be used for something
               | else.
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | > Looking at the levels of obesity in the U.S.,
               | 
               | This is not unique to the US. Can't really say "but we
               | only have 25% obesity here" and call that any kind of
               | win. Maybe the US leads in this regards (though it varies
               | by region, some areas have European-level obesity rates),
               | but obesity is a worldwide problem.
        
             | ryanbrunner wrote:
             | > * In stark contrast to asking questions and trying to
             | understand. But I have family members who are the "look
             | everything up and then try to tell my doctor how they're
             | going to treat me" ilk and it's crazy.
             | 
             | I think this is exacerbated by doctors a lot of the time.
             | I'm in Canada so it's obviously a very different system,
             | but visits to a GP often have strict time limits and "one
             | issue only" rules. When you can only talk about one
             | symptom, and you only have 5 minutes to explain it, it's
             | natural to try and do homework first to see what you're
             | going to use your limited time on.
        
             | 93po wrote:
             | > people thinking being able to Google and read WebMD
             | qualifies them to argue with their doctor about treatment
             | plans
             | 
             | In my experience, I have had:
             | 
             | 1. Doctors that know nothing about a really basic ailment
             | and not have any meaningful guidance or treatment to
             | suggest
             | 
             | 2. Doctors that Google something literally in front of me,
             | things that I have already Googled myself, and draw the
             | wrong conclusion because they're looking at results at a
             | glance - when I had searched myself earlier and dug deeper
             | though, it was clear to me the result he was looking at was
             | just plain wrong
             | 
             | 3. Doctors that provide very little to no guidance about a
             | wide selection of medications available to treat a problem,
             | leaving me to essentially guess which option of a dozen or
             | more I should go with
             | 
             | 4. Doctors that force me to advocate for myself and my
             | condition before they agree to help treat it - so much so
             | that I had to visit 4 different doctors to find one that
             | would, wasting nearly a thousand dollars of office visits
             | with nothing to show for it.
             | 
             | It's no wonder people do their own research and dare to
             | advocate for themselves. Most doctors are fucking
             | worthless.
        
               | 77pt77 wrote:
               | You forgot one.
               | 
               | Doctors that blatantly lie to your face because they want
               | to push some procedure.
        
               | hallway_monitor wrote:
               | I cannot agree enough. I think anyone who has dealt with
               | a puzzling condition quickly learns how limited the
               | "expertise" of these supposed authorities is. Sure,
               | insurance companies are terrible, but so are most
               | doctors. Great, quit, you probably sucked anyway.
        
               | aqfamnzc wrote:
               | It also probably doesn't help that doctors are jacks-of-
               | all-trades medically - there are simply too much
               | complexity to thoroughly understand the nuances of every
               | obscure condition and interaction.
               | 
               | However, I think acknowledging when one doesn't know
               | something is a skill many could benefit from improving...
        
               | momirlan wrote:
               | just adding a case when a doctor prescribed double the
               | quantity for an infant. i spotted it right away, he
               | panicked, asked to have the prescription back and
               | promptly destroyed it.
        
               | ClumsyPilot wrote:
               | Indeed, there have been mutiple instances where, if I had
               | not put my foot down,i would be left untreated and
               | undiagnosed.
               | 
               | Doctors are not like other proffeshions, they cannot put
               | things right if the opportunity for treatment is missed
        
               | Melatonic wrote:
               | I felt the same way until I started being more active in
               | choosing quality doctors. Doctors are no different than
               | any other profession - there are the ones at the bottom
               | of their league that are just going through the motions
               | and there are the superstars working for some of the best
               | institutions in the world. The key I have found is to
               | specifically look for doctors that are either actively
               | involved in academic research pertaining to your ailment
               | or are working at quality institutions that are engaging
               | in research that is at least tangentially related to your
               | issue.
               | 
               | Keep in mind they also have to do a stupid amount of
               | paperwork these days for every patient and the place they
               | work for may be overscheduling the crap out of them -
               | generally (unfortunately) I always consider my first
               | appointment to be sort of a wash due to this and assume I
               | am not going to really get anywhere until the second time
               | I see them.
        
             | Djvacto wrote:
             | As a quick counter-point to *, there is another sub-problem
             | with healthcare/doctors in the US, where often patients
             | with chronic illnesses or not-easily-testable conditions
             | have to fight hard for doctors to take them seriously. The
             | why of this varies a lot from what I've seen, but includes:
             | 
             | - an attitude of "most patients are just trying to wring
             | medications out of you" - an ego-hit of "if I didn't make
             | the diagnosis, I don't want to help" (this applies to both
             | patients coming in with a suspicion of what they have, or
             | getting a diagnosis from another doctor) - burn-
             | out/overworking, where doctors have a hard time managing
             | all the different cases coming at them without dropping the
             | ball here and there
             | 
             | It's not a simple, single-cause problem at all, but just
             | want to provide an alternative point of view about patients
             | who look things up or come in asking about a specific
             | condition or diagnosis.
             | 
             | When I got my ADHD diagnosis after a quarter-century, I
             | went in specifically asking about ADHD because I had seen
             | some flags that made me think I might have ADHD. Contrast
             | that with the people doctors screen out who are trying to
             | get a stimulant prescription despite not needing it, and
             | you have a situation where it's hard for doctors to tell
             | who does or doesn't need meds, and where patients with
             | actual conditions have to fight hard for those to be
             | diagnosed.
             | 
             | Even in cases like POTS, which has no medication involved
             | in treatment, just lifestyle changes, and yet people close
             | to me who have POTS all had an uphill battle getting it
             | recognized by anyone, especially doctors who could diagnose
             | (disclaimer: sample size = 3).
        
               | argc wrote:
               | > When I got my ADHD diagnosis after a quarter-century, I
               | went in specifically asking about ADHD because I had seen
               | some flags that made me think I might have ADHD. Contrast
               | that with the people doctors screen out who are trying to
               | get a stimulant prescription despite not needing it, and
               | you have a situation where it's hard for doctors to tell
               | who does or doesn't need meds, and where patients with
               | actual conditions have to fight hard for those to be
               | diagnosed.
               | 
               | I told my doctor I had already been diagnosed with ADHD
               | because I had a strong suspicion I had it and wanted to
               | see for myself if the medication helped (it helped
               | massively). I think medicine should be accessible for
               | patients who need it but I don't know how to avoid large
               | amounts of patients then taking medications for the wrong
               | thing, which would probably happen if it was a free-for-
               | all. It kinda comes down to the question of having the
               | personal freedom to hurt yourself doing something stupid,
               | which is a balance (a little of that freedom is good, too
               | much probably bad). All-in-all I lean toward the current
               | system of using on experts to make the final decision.
               | Still, I would be really pissed if a doctor prevented me
               | from getting stimulants for something I believe I need,
               | so I am not 100% satisfied with the current system
               | either.
        
               | suchire wrote:
               | Another wrinkle to the problem with that gatekeeping
               | structure is that it is so prone to bias against women
               | and people of color, who are much more likely to be
               | undiagnosed and ignored or dismissed.
        
               | tomrod wrote:
               | I'm not sure why this is being downvoted. This is a
               | legitimate issue, divorced from politics completely
               | (politics usually result in downvotes).
               | 
               | [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4638275/
               | 
               | [1] https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/gender-
               | bias-in-hea...
        
               | lostlogin wrote:
               | Could someone explain what's inaccurate here?
               | 
               | Edit: It originally appears to be getting heavily
               | downvoted.
        
               | clankyclanker wrote:
               | Nothing is inaccurate. Here's a few primary and secondary
               | sources.
               | 
               | https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/women-and-pain-
               | dispariti...
               | 
               | > a 2000 study[0] published in The New England Journal of
               | Medicine found that women are seven times more likely
               | than men to be misdiagnosed and discharged in the middle
               | of having a heart attack.
               | 
               | 0:
               | http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200008243430809
               | 
               | https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-
               | families...
               | 
               | > women with chronic pain conditions are more likely to
               | be wrongly diagnosed with mental health conditions than
               | men and prescribed psychotropic drugs, as doctors dismiss
               | their symptoms as hysterics [1].
               | 
               | 1: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1990-98104-000
               | 
               | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4843483/
               | 
               | > racial bias in pain perception is associated with
               | racial bias in pain treatment recommendations... Black
               | Americans are systematically undertreated for pain
               | relative to white Americans.
        
               | advael wrote:
               | I view drug enforcement policy meant to prevent
               | individuals from making decisions for themselves as
               | always doing more harm than good. The place for
               | regulation in this space is controlling what claims
               | profit-motivated entities can make about drugs, enforcing
               | quality and safety standards in manufacturing, and
               | honestly tying the hands of insurance companies as much
               | as possible, if not just gutting them altogether
        
               | Melatonic wrote:
               | The counterpoint to your last thing is that there are
               | also many ailments that we literally just do not have
               | enough info about yet to have proper treatments. And if
               | we are studying such things many doctors are not going to
               | always be up on the latest research for that specific
               | condition.
               | 
               | I have found it helpful to approach it in more of a
               | teamwork-like mentality. Don't just read WebMD and try to
               | diagnose yourself - journal your symptoms, observe the
               | trends, record data. If it seems like it points to a
               | specific condition hop on Google Scholar and look for
               | some legitimate new research the average doctor may not
               | have heard about. Print that out and then when you go in
               | show them and ask questions without attempting to
               | specifically diagnose yourself.
               | 
               | You could be totally wrong but with some background info
               | your doctor is much more likely to accurately diagnose
               | and take you seriously.
        
               | drc500free wrote:
               | I'm more and more convinced that POTS/EDS/MCAS aren't
               | rare diseases, they're just criminally under-diagnosed
               | because they tend to affect women. FWIW, POTS is much
               | more manageable with medication (e.g. Midodrine and
               | Florinef).
        
               | 77pt77 wrote:
               | > criminally under-diagnosed because they tend to effect
               | women
               | 
               | I just can't understand this argument. Women already live
               | 5 years longer than men on average. You mean to tell me
               | if the system didn't discriminate so strongly against
               | their best interest they'd live even longer than men?
        
               | ejb999 wrote:
               | nurses are 91% female and doctors are about 37% female -
               | are they also 'criminally under-diagnosing'? Seems there
               | are quite a few more women in healthcare than men these
               | days.
        
               | thewebcount wrote:
               | Yeah, I've witnessed this first hand with my spouse.
               | She's been told she just needs to exercise more (she was
               | a professional dancer when it hit her), that it's all in
               | her head (actual psychiatrist said otherwise), that it
               | will resolve in 6-18 months (it didn't), etc., etc. It's
               | pretty appalling.
               | 
               | Thanks for mentioning POTS, btw. Despite how many people
               | have it, it's still fairly poorly known about even within
               | the medical community.
        
             | wolf550e wrote:
             | re: "Medical decisions need to be made outside of cost
             | considerations."
             | 
             | In the end, labor hours of professionals are finite. Even
             | if you don't need to pay doctors, you only have so many,
             | they can only work so many hours, you will need to
             | prioritize who to help in what way, which procedures to do.
             | Same with all the other personnel, the consumable stuff,
             | the devices/scanners/equipment, etc. So someone is going to
             | have to prioritize. It can be just "how much quality of
             | life can we save using the resources we have", regardless
             | of the patient's ability to pay/insurance/citizenship, but
             | some prioritization will need to happen. The policy of the
             | death panels can be changed, but their existence is
             | inevitable.
        
               | slantedview wrote:
               | > labor hours of professionals are finite.
               | 
               | This is why it makes no sense to have doctors and nurses
               | waste time battling insurance companies over treatments,
               | and hospitals over staffing. Their time is indeed too
               | valuable.
        
               | wing-_-nuts wrote:
               | This is exactly why we should simply just expand medicare
               | to be an option for everyone. If it's good enough for
               | everyone over 65, it's good enough for everyone under it
               | too. I'm ok with paying a reasonable premium to have
               | access to the largest insurance network in the nation.
        
               | elhudy wrote:
               | Simply? It is not so simple. Medicare reimbursement rates
               | are way below commercial rates and hospitals wouldn't
               | survive just from medicare reimbursement alone.
               | 
               | Let's stop trying to come up with "simple" solutions to
               | the healthcare catastrophe in the US because the reality
               | is more complex.
        
               | wing-_-nuts wrote:
               | So raise the reimbursement rates to the point where
               | hospitals can survive, or cut the fat. See? Simple.
               | 
               | Every time someone makes an argument like this, it's
               | always to say that somehow, medical treatment in the USA
               | is _special_ compared to other countries. We couldn 't
               | _possibly_ have universal healthcare work here. Please.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | Possibly misattributed, but usually given to HL Mencken:
               | 
               | "For every problem, there is a solution that is simple,
               | neat, and wrong."
               | 
               | Don't kid yourself into thinking a complex system that
               | makes up 20% of GDP is going to have a simple solution.
               | Just a couple examples you'd have to contend with:
               | 
               | 1) Insurance companies get a say too, according to the
               | Constitution. That means they get to lobby in their own
               | interests. That political problem itself is a boondoggle.
               | 
               | 2) The US funds a disproportionate amount of medical R&D.
               | Some of that fat is going to be cut from research. You
               | need to have a plan on how that will effect long term
               | quality of care and innovation.
               | 
               | 3) Physician licensures are limited by the AMA. If you
               | expand coverage, you will need to expand supply because
               | any time something becomes "free", people will consume
               | more of it. That's not a necessarily bad thing in
               | healthcare, but needs to be addressed. The AMA also gets
               | to defend their political interests.
               | 
               | There's lots and lots of other issues. I'm not claiming
               | the US healthcare system is great. But pretending it has
               | a simple fix is naive.
        
               | wing-_-nuts wrote:
               | Again, I point to the fact that nearly every other
               | industrialized nation does it better than us, with a
               | fraction of the resources. I find it highly suspect when
               | people say the problem is so complex we can't possibly
               | fix it. Every other major western (and some asian)
               | economy has addressed this. We are not exceptional. We
               | can fix this too.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | Yes, but that is, in part, because the US effectively
               | subsidizes other countries medical R&D. Similar when
               | other countries cap their drug costs while the profits
               | are made up within the US. That means we subsidize other
               | countries healthcare costs at the expense of our own. A
               | country-to-country comparison is incomplete without
               | understanding those systemic issues.
               | 
               | It's like when people point out how much the US spends on
               | the military compared to other Western industrialized
               | nations. Part of that discrepancy is due to the fact that
               | the US disproportionately funds organizations like NATO.
               | Other countries reap the benefit without footing the
               | bill. There was a lot of outrage in Europe when the US
               | tried to enforce the NATO GDP spend that other countries
               | _already agreed to._
               | 
               | The US can do better, but I would argue we can't unless
               | we fully understand the complexities of the system. That
               | means not getting enamored by the idea that there are
               | simple fixes. The first step IMO is getting the political
               | will to do so (and to understand the tradeoffs within a
               | complex system), because many of the potentially
               | solutions are stymied at Congress.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | But this is exactly why administrative roles are created
               | to help alleviate that dilemma, so primary care providers
               | can focus more time on patients.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | samstave wrote:
             | > _I strongly believe that only physicians should be
             | running hospitals._
             | 
             |  _(Disclaimer: I have been on the design team for several
             | hospitals, including El Camino and San Francisco General,
             | in the bay area - and I have a family of doctors and nurses
             | in my family - my brother was head of the Veteran
             | Administration for the state of Alaska, and is currently
             | CMO for a large health provider (he is a doctor)_
             | 
             | ---
             | 
             | That said, the "running" of a hospital isa hell of a lot
             | more than medicine (when we are specifically talking to the
             | _running of_ -- but this comment was made in relation to
             | costs /efficiencies as far as outcomes, patient treatment,
             | insurance etc...)
             | 
             | Hospitals are really complex ecosystems and should be
             | thought of more like an aircraft carrier than an other form
             | of business.
             | 
             | The costs within the realm of a hospital are ridiculous -
             | as are the methods and manner in which hospitals raise
             | money.
             | 
             | Insurance is cancer to be sure, but there are so many other
             | factors that go into the operational costs of a hospital -
             | and I don't just mean ngoing care and operations - systems
             | and technology and medicine evolve. People are people and
             | regardless have the same hierachy of needs in any
             | environment.
             | 
             | You have every single actor as an enemy of the hospital
             | bottom line:
             | 
             | New tech, $$
             | 
             | Older nursing pop $$
             | 
             | Current nursing/doctor market salaries $$
             | 
             | Maintenance for existing systems $$
             | 
             | Insurance billing code lock-in $$
             | 
             | Competing hospitals for doctors and nursing staff $$
             | 
             | California $$
             | 
             | Corruption $$
             | 
             | Utilities and related redundant infra to ensure life
             | systems
             | 
             | The ridiculous cost to upgrade
             | 
             | The list goes on and on...
             | 
             | (The cheapest hospital project I worked on was hundreds of
             | millions of dollars)
             | 
             | etc...
             | 
             | Hospitals are really expensive to run, and it requires a
             | hell of a lot more skills than simply being a "doctor" to
             | run one.
        
             | dr_ wrote:
             | Let me add two more payment scenarios: 1) Pay in the form
             | of a credit card number, where the provider ends up paying
             | CC processing fees to process the payment. 2) Ask for the
             | money back, months later.
        
             | dan_quixote wrote:
             | > Insurance is the only industry where they agree to pay
             | for something (in this case, "medical care"), but then
             | after service has been rendered can decide to pay less, or
             | not pay at all, or stop paying that provider altogether
             | 
             | This is precisely why I think we will never be able to
             | effectively treat healthcare as a "free market" with tools
             | like HSAs, posted price sheet, etc. The end user can never
             | know the true cost of their procedure until it's long over
             | (sometimes years later) and often don't get to choose at
             | all.
        
             | mminer237 wrote:
             | > I strongly believe that only physicians should be running
             | hospitals.
             | 
             | This is how it is for other professional industries. As an
             | attorney, you can lose your license for sharing any profits
             | with someone who isn't a lawyer. I believe states typically
             | require accounting and engineering firms to either be
             | wholly or two-thirds owned by such professionals as well.
        
               | scarface74 wrote:
               | What does that even mean? All lawyers have support staff
               | where the lawyers "share" their billable votes with non
               | lawyers
        
               | brianwawok wrote:
               | > I believe states typically require accounting and
               | engineering firms to either be wholly or two-thirds owned
               | by such professionals as well.
               | 
               | What states are these, Canadian states?
               | 
               | In the US, many many many SaaS shops are wholly owned by
               | businessmen / bean counters. It's like, weird, to be an
               | engineer who runs a software company.
        
               | nawgz wrote:
               | > engineering firm
               | 
               | > SaaS shop
               | 
               | Now, I get we like to refer to ourselves as Software
               | Engineers, but surely you understand he means actual
               | certified engineering firms, not groups of code monkeys,
               | right? Software is virtually never engineering, you'd
               | have to get to a situation like flight control software
               | before you're doing anything legit
        
               | brianwawok wrote:
               | I am a software engineer and do not consider myself a
               | code monkey. Do not speak for all of us.
        
               | nawgz wrote:
               | If you have never stepped into a domain where you have to
               | formally verify your software, I think you should
               | probably not take too much offense to such a comment.
               | While I admit it may be slightly negatively connoted, I
               | primarily used it to illustrate that the kind of
               | engineering going into making a bridge differs greatly
               | from making your UI widget pixel-perfect or your SQL
               | query from being too polynomial
        
               | scarface74 wrote:
               | I'm sure "sales engineers" feel the same way...
        
               | chrisux wrote:
               | I feel like the person you are responding to was not
               | meaning software engineering. Electrical engineering,
               | Chemical engineering, Civil engineering, Mechanical
               | engineering, etc are all more likely: especially as what
               | you say about software engineering is definitely well
               | known.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | They are talking about the "applied physics" engineering
               | fields.
        
               | kllvql wrote:
               | I believe this is in reference to Professional
               | Engineering firms, which often requires PEs either as
               | owners or in certain roles. As far as I'm aware software
               | engineers are not required to be Professional Engineers
               | in the US for most tasks, nor are SaaS shops required to
               | be licensed as Engineering firms.
               | 
               | [1]
               | https://www.harborcompliance.com/information/engineering-
               | fir...
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | NCEES did toy with the idea of a software engineer
               | Professional Engineer license, but it went away due to
               | too little interest. I think it was in part that industry
               | didn't want it because it would give more leverage to
               | SEs. IMO the only way that will become commonplace is if
               | it is forced by regulation.
        
               | zip1234 wrote:
               | From what I can tell, this is just to keep money in the
               | hands of lawyers and keep prices high.
               | 
               | There are plenty of things that could be done better now
               | by non-lawyers with the help of lawyers (look at Rocket
               | law).
        
               | j-krieger wrote:
               | Why _shouldn't_ money from law be kept in the hands of
               | lawyers? It's a grueling education with an even more
               | grueling exam and even now a lot of law graduates can
               | barely afford to keep a roof over their head
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | Because the profession is meant to serve the public
               | interests and not just be a money grab. According to
               | government data, the median lawyer is in the top 10% of
               | income earners.
        
               | scarface74 wrote:
               | To put numbers on it. To get to the top 10% of income you
               | only have to make around $120K.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | Correct. ONet data puts the median lawyer at about $127k.
               | From what I could find, 90th percentile of income is
               | around $126k.
               | 
               | While I know HN is probably SV and software biased,
               | saying "only" $120k comes across as out-of-touch for the
               | way most people live. For comparison, the median SF
               | lawyer makes $191k according to BLS data. I could not
               | quickly find 90 percentile data for the area.
        
               | scarface74 wrote:
               | Your average Enterprise CRUD developer in any major city
               | in the US can hit that number within 3-5 years and a job
               | hop. It's not exclusively a SV thing.
               | 
               | And your number is correct according to Census data.
               | 
               | https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-individual-income-
               | perce...
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | I agree, but it's still out of touch. (not a knock on
               | you, we are all subjectively influenced by what we come
               | into contact with the most and interpreting it as
               | 'normal'. It's also why something like 90% of people
               | consider themselves middle class.) The fact that you have
               | to narrow it down to software development and major
               | cities should tell you that much. That's also why my
               | original comment included both SV and software as biasing
               | factors.
               | 
               | The average person does not develop software and does not
               | live in a major city. If somebody is making double the
               | median wage and 2.5x the average wage and complaining
               | about keeping a roof over their head, they can probably
               | expect some sideways glances. It's like when people
               | complain about the difficulty of making ends meet once
               | they make their Lexus payment and pay their kids private
               | tuition bill. The subjective struggle may be legitimate
               | but it's still out of touch with the experience of most
               | people.
        
               | WoahNoun wrote:
               | Many states of laws regulating the "corporate practice of
               | medicine." But it seems like that leads to a hospital
               | just being bunch of loosely held together independent
               | businesses/contractors.
        
             | travisjungroth wrote:
             | > * In stark contrast to asking questions and trying to
             | understand. But I have family members who are the "look
             | everything up and then try to tell my doctor how they're
             | going to treat me" ilk and it's crazy.
             | 
             | I still think it's better than the other extreme of just
             | showing up and trusting the professionals. That should work
             | in theory, but my experience for myself and those around me
             | is it's incredibly ineffective. If what you're dealing with
             | requires the least bit of thought, odds are you're getting
             | brushed off to the extent you allow.
             | 
             | The _real_ model of US healthcare is essentially apprentice
             | /master, with the patient as apprentice. Apprentice does a
             | lot of the work, not all, some needs to be approved by the
             | master and the apprentice better know how to learn from the
             | master, when to push back, and how to make it seem like it
             | was their idea all along. You can imagine how this falls
             | apart for mental health.
        
               | AlphaOne1 wrote:
               | I also think the complete implosion of family medicine
               | has made this worse. In the past, you would keep the same
               | family medicine doctor for decades and trust them. They
               | in turn would know what your values and priorities are.
               | Moreover, they would be able to guide you through
               | difficult healthcare decisions that inevitably come up
               | (cancer diagnosis, mental health etc.). We have lost the
               | human connection aspect of medicine and those few
               | physicians that are able to hang on to it are burning out
               | due to the massive amounts of paperwork they need to
               | accomplish. From the hospital perspective, (which many
               | physicians now work for) good paperwork=good patient
               | care. Paperwork is measurable. Relationships (other than
               | in the abstract) are not.
        
         | kurthr wrote:
         | Having worked in Tech for many years at corporations large and
         | small, I have seen companies run by Founders, by Sales, by
         | Marketing, by Finance, by Engineering, and by Legal. Each had
         | their plusses an minuses.
         | 
         | Until I saw hospital nursing, I had never seen a company run by
         | HR.
         | 
         | Every decision starts and ends with HR. From hiring, to wages,
         | to discipline and promotion, to IT and pay-roll, to
         | reorganization and spending priorities, there is a rule for
         | that. Maybe that rule originally came from the CEO or the CNO,
         | but they say things like "may" and get interpreted as "shall"
         | (or the manager faces a bad review and/or termination) or they
         | are interpreted beyond any rational meaning. My best
         | explanation is that it comes from a fear of litigation and a
         | lack of leadership at the top. The final hilarious story is the
         | CEO negotiating a big deal with lawyers and VPs shaking
         | hands... and then saying without joking, "but I'll have to get
         | HR's approval". The meeting wasn't important enough for HR to
         | show up, but they had the last say.
        
           | beezlebroxxxxxx wrote:
           | If you follow the history of HR departments in a lot of
           | modern corporations you often see them operating as private
           | in-house legal firms, and aggressively expanding their
           | purview to include even actions at the executive level. The
           | only thing most HR departments look out for is HR. Everything
           | they do resolves around continuing or expanding the power of
           | the HR department.
           | 
           | Your comment on lack of leadership is spot on. No one wants
           | to be accountable. Instead HR departments put in place
           | bureaucracy that works to deny individual fallibility in the
           | name of a "system of human resource management". They want to
           | treat people like a cog in a machine instead of as people.
        
             | inetknght wrote:
             | > _No one wants to be accountable._
             | 
             | That is American corporations in a nutshell. Outsource
             | everything, put layers upon layers, and insulate yourself.
             | Then when fecal matter hits the rotary you can put the
             | blame on others and, at worst, you get fired and there's
             | little to no worry about any sort of legal reprecussion
             | because... well you weren't accountable for the problems in
             | the first place!
             | 
             | It's a massive problem created from little cuts here and
             | there with a few big lawsuits mixed in.
        
               | kickout wrote:
               | Agree with you, but people on HN and other places tend to
               | flame/heckle companies that don't do this too, aka Elon
               | Musk. Love him or hate him he does things 'his' way
               | without all the seemingly built-in middle layers. I like
               | it as opposed to the HR led office space cosplay, but
               | people seem to want their cake and eat it too.
        
         | smoe wrote:
         | Both my mother and sister were nurses and disenchanted with the
         | profession (in Switzerland) long before the pandemic hit, as
         | the hospitals got completely mba'd during their careers.
         | Whereas in the past they could actually take time interacting
         | with patients, now everything needs to be Lean and it's just
         | about shoveling people through the system with minimum
         | resources while extracting ever more money. I don't see how
         | this can end well.
         | 
         | My mother switched to an administrative role internally, 10
         | years before she got retired and my sister went from nurse to
         | anesthetist and now in the progress of moving to IT as a domain
         | expert for medical software so she can work from home.
        
         | Spooky23 wrote:
         | Yes. The system is gross. When my dad suffered from a stroke
         | (pre-COVID), the level of neglect and poor care he received was
         | startling. He died before he should have after making
         | substantial recovery due to the side-effects of being in a
         | hospital.
         | 
         | My mom was a long-retired medical director of a hospital and
         | even she was shocked at poor quality of care, compassion and
         | competence. Even in the ER of a recognized trauma center,
         | things were pretty meh. Some specialist floors and ICU were
         | good, but when an infection caused by poor hospital hygiene
         | struck, he was relegated to the "medical" floor, where he was
         | not fed, medicated, turned or treated with respect. Ultimately
         | we maintained a 24x7 staffing of family volunteers for over 6
         | weeks.
         | 
         | Many of the staff frankly sucked. But it was easy to see why -
         | the staffing levels were so poor _pre-COVID_ , that any RN
         | risks license every day by virtue of being there. The smart
         | ones GTFO. You can't care for 15 patients.
        
         | dsugarman wrote:
         | My frame of reference on this topic is that my family is mainly
         | medical doctors and I started and run a yc backed Series A
         | stage startup.
         | 
         | In my experience, the administrators are often doctors at
         | hospitals and people all the way to the top have to have strong
         | medical backgrounds. That's not to say there aren't do-nothing
         | administrators, but those do-nothing administrators are often
         | doctors. They tend to adhere to the way things are and always
         | were as an orthodoxy, like 1st year residency is the worst and
         | at these points quality of life improve, but it's almost like a
         | fraternity hazing justifying the insane hours, complete loss of
         | work life balance just because this is how it is. Candidly,
         | there does seem to be a guilty pleasure there.
         | 
         | There is little to no real discussion on how to improve not
         | only the work conditions but also the user experience of
         | medical care. In my view, it starts at the top;
         | organizationally, they are lacking an entire skillset to make
         | any improvements what-so-ever.
        
         | archhn wrote:
         | See "The Managerial Revolution" by James Burnham.
        
         | m_ke wrote:
         | My SO is a healthcare worker as well, she just graduated 2
         | years ago and has major regrets about her decision. She'd leave
         | and try and do something else but she has mid 6 figure debt, to
         | make things worse she was rear-ended her last year of school
         | and has back issues that make it hard for her to handle the 12
         | hours shifts.
         | 
         | She's looking to switch jobs now and her first offer expected
         | her to travel to locations deep in queens, manhattan and
         | brooklyn, seeing on average 50 patients a day. She currently
         | works at one of the largest hospital chains in NY and is now
         | negotiating an offer from the other largest chain, initially
         | she was told to not worry about salary and that they'd be able
         | to match her previous offer, then HR called her and told her
         | she had 1 and not 2 years of experience so the best offer they
         | can offer her is lower than expected, she said she wouldn't be
         | able to do it so the HR people went to check again to see what
         | they can do and it turns out they called up the hospital that
         | my SO works at now and checked their pay tiers and said they
         | can only match the number that they were told. The new position
         | was close to where we live so she considered taking it anyways
         | but they just called her again and asked her if she'd be
         | willing to travel to other locations multiple times a week to
         | help fill in gaps (but weren't even able to tell her which
         | locations before accepting the offer).
         | 
         | TLDR: don't let your friends and family go into healthcare
        
         | anon23anon wrote:
         | I'm sure this is the top comment b/c we as developers have
         | basically lost our professional agency to do do nothings roles
         | like project manager/project owner/"business people". It's
         | frustrating. I've been in the game a long time. It was way more
         | fun when the web was still new and for the most part didn't
         | care a whole lot about tech.
        
         | zeruch wrote:
         | "is quite puzzling"
         | 
         | Is it?
         | 
         | The financialization of every aspect of life, in this case with
         | for-profit hospitals through multiple layers of insurance
         | middle-men, the exodus you describe would seem one of the
         | natural byproducts from miles away.
        
         | PragmaticPulp wrote:
         | > How doctors of all professions lost their professional agency
         | to do-nothing administrators within a generation is quite
         | puzzling and a bit terrifying to me.
         | 
         | I have a lot of friends at various levels of healthcare, from
         | nursing up through low and mid-level administrative positions.
         | 
         | The one thing they all seem to agree on is that patient
         | satisfaction surveys have been terrible for healthcare.
         | 
         | Once the emphasis shifted to patient satisfaction, everything
         | became more of a game of catering to what the patient _thinks_
         | they want. With the spread of rampant medical misinformation on
         | the internet and the rise of alternative-medicine podcasts
         | /blogs/influencers masquerading as informed medical
         | professionals they have a constant influx of patients who show
         | up believing they have a certain condition or need a certain
         | medication. If you disagree too much or refuse to give them the
         | medication they want, you risk a negative review. Too many
         | negative reviews could negatively impact your compensation or
         | even cost you your job.
         | 
         | Even at offices that don't perform patient satisfaction
         | surveys, providers are at the mercy of negative online reviews.
         | Again, if you don't do exactly what the patient thinks they
         | want, you risk scathing online reviews.
         | 
         | This is terrifyingly problematic given the trend of people to
         | self-diagnose with anxiety or infections who show up demanding
         | Xanax or antibiotics. Puts doctors in a situation where they
         | don't really think prescribing those medications is a good
         | idea, but they also feel like they can't deny too many patients
         | or they risk their reputation/bonus/reviews.
         | 
         | It's also a huge problem with conditions like obesity or
         | alcoholism or smoking, where the doctors can see obvious
         | patient-induced health issues but the patient really doesn't
         | want to hear the truth from their doctor.
        
           | CityOfThrowaway wrote:
           | Patient satisfaction surveys are the legible feedback
           | mechanism showing that something is deeply broken, but not
           | the _source_ of the problem itself.
           | 
           | It's clear from your comment that the _source_ of the problem
           | is the increasingly sharp divide between what the
           | credentialed medical professionals believe and what lay
           | people believe. The satisfaction survey is simply uncovering
           | that fact.
           | 
           | It would be vastly worse if patients were being treated and
           | had no recourse when they felt their health was mismanaged.
           | It may well be the case that the patients are _wrong_ , but
           | it is extremely dystopian to imagine a world where
           | individuals are not empowered to make decisions about their
           | own bodies.
        
             | pc86 wrote:
             | Patients have always been entitled to make decisions about
             | their bodies. You can decline procedures, and treatment,
             | and you can get second, third, fourth, fifth opinions.
             | Satisfaction surveys do nothing to increase that autonomy.
             | The dystopian world you speak of is a straw man.
             | 
             | The problems stems from people believing they are consumers
             | of healthcare, on equal footing with the practitioner they
             | are seeing. They're not, objectively. A 45 minute Google
             | search doesn't equal 4 years of college (usually in
             | something like biochem but not always), 4 years of medical
             | school, 3-7 years of residency training and potentially
             | another 1-4 years of fellowship training. If you're seeing
             | anyone above a family doctor/PCP, they 100% know more about
             | your condition than you do, whether you've been living with
             | it for a decade or not.
             | 
             | That doesn't mean you don't have autonomy, or that you
             | shouldn't question your doctor's decisions and ask for
             | explanations, but it does mean you should err on the side
             | of thinking the person whose spent at least a decade, but
             | probably closer to two, educating themselves to get where
             | they are probably knows what they're talking about.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | > they 100% know more about your condition than you do,
               | whether you've been living with it for a decade or not.
               | 
               | I was with you up until this point. Part of the problem
               | is that this cannot be true in all cases, unless either
               | (a) your condition is commonplace (b) the doctor
               | specializes in your condition.
               | 
               | Yes, doctors know more than you in almost every way about
               | bodies about medicine, about drugs. However, people with
               | relatively uncommon conditions have been enabled (largely
               | by the internet) to create communities of fellow
               | condition-sufferers, and the collections of anecdata that
               | result represent a resource that generalist doctors do
               | not have access to. The good specialists, in some cases,
               | will take occasional dips in to augment their own
               | knowledge and expertise.
               | 
               | Case in point: my daughter has had two major hip
               | surgeries. While there is no way anyone in their right
               | minds would have chosen someone who had not performed
               | these surgeries previously (preferably, many times), and
               | while it was completely clear that the surgeons really
               | really really knew what they were doing, it was also the
               | case that various online communities made up of people
               | who have been through this procedure were able to provide
               | lots of information that the surgeons could/would not.
               | This was particularly true of the recovery process, where
               | there were a number of common oddities that most people
               | who have the procedure experience, and they're really not
               | a problem. They are scary however, and the actual medical
               | professionals really had nothing useful to say about
               | them.
               | 
               | There's another issue with the blanket "doc knows best"
               | rule. If you've had a GP for many years, or a specialist
               | helping you with a condition for many years, then it's
               | probably a great rule of thumb. On the other hand, if
               | you've moved, or for any other reason switched doctors,
               | and you're the kind of person who does _pay attention_ to
               | their body, there 's a reasonable chance that you're
               | going to know things about yourself/your body that the
               | new doc(s) will likely not be aware of. They can (and
               | will) learn, of course, and there's no reason to be
               | aggressive or patronizing about it. But for example, you
               | may understand the way you typically recover from
               | antibiotic treatments, or the consequences of lack of
               | sleep, or your tendency to always pull a lower back
               | muscle given certain movements, etc. etc. in ways that
               | your (newish) doctor may not yet be wise to.
        
               | Buttons840 wrote:
               | > The problems stems from people believing they are
               | consumers of healthcare, on equal footing with the
               | practitioner they are seeing. They're not, objectively.
               | 
               | Objectively, the patient is the only one who has 500,000
               | hours of experience with the unique and very complicated
               | system we call a body, and is objectively the only one
               | who comprehends what they're feeling. They're also the
               | one who experiences the consequences, they're the only
               | ones with literal skin in the game. How much is all of
               | this worth?
               | 
               | It's a difficult thing. The answer is some mix of giving
               | the doctor and patient power.
        
               | pc86 wrote:
               | The patient already has absolute power. They don't have
               | to accept any treatment they don't want to.
               | 
               | The patient may be comprehending how they _feel_ but that
               | absolutely doesn 't mean that they understand the complex
               | interactions within their body, which the physician does
               | know.
        
             | PragmaticPulp wrote:
             | That's the theory - That patient satisfaction surveys will
             | uncover the bad providers.
             | 
             | But in the real world, if someone is receiving bad care
             | they don't continue making followup appointments with that
             | doctor. Nobody continues going back to the same bad doctor
             | over and over again and writing negative reviews. It's
             | really easy to calculate churn rate for individual
             | providers.
             | 
             | The hot topic now is tracking outcomes: The idea is that
             | with enough data collection and crunching, we can
             | eventually start tracking which providers have better
             | outcomes among their patients. This is one of those things
             | that sounds great on paper but has a lot of challenges in
             | the real world. It's also prone to gaming, as we've seen
             | from surgeons who have learned to avoid difficult cases so
             | they can avoid the risk of another patient death statistic.
        
           | hedora wrote:
           | That reminds me. I have one laying around to fill out.
           | 
           | 10/10 plan to get sick again.
        
           | bitsnbytes wrote:
           | "The one thing they all seem to agree on is that patient
           | satisfaction surveys have been terrible for healthcare."
           | 
           | My Wife is an ER nurse manager and while you have many self
           | entitled idiotic patients that think they are staying in a
           | resort versus visiting an ER, the patient satisfaction
           | surveys is not very high in regards to the issue and why
           | nurses are leaving.
           | 
           | My wife actually had a person complain that the ER did not
           | have cow bells to call for a nurse (She claimed to be a
           | retired nurse and they always had that for back up, lol) and
           | they constantly complain how come they came in first for a
           | stubbed toe, but another patient with a gunshot wound or
           | heart attack is being seen first.
           | 
           | The bigger issue as why nurses are leaving the field from
           | what she has seen and experienced is:
           | 
           | 1. wages: The wages are beyond inadequate in certain nursing
           | specialties and many have left to become traveling nurses or
           | contracted nurses that get paid double the standard nurse
           | pay.
           | 
           | 2. Burn out: Besides covid, Hospitals Patient to nurse ratio
           | is often exceeded and no accountability for the hospital to
           | break those ratios. Nor any consideration for a high demand
           | patient versus a low demand patient. Then when something goes
           | wrong the hospital looks to pin it on the nurses. This was an
           | issue before covid . but covid just added fuel to the fire.
           | 
           | 3. BS. nurses get bs from ALL sides. They get bs from the
           | patients and even more bs from upper management who set
           | unrealistic process in place that is more concerned by hiding
           | accountability and making things look good on paper than
           | actual patient care. Then you had that whole BS covid
           | movement crap calling nurses hero but besides lip service
           | they did absolutely nothing for them. In fact they did the
           | opposite. I know my wife had to fight the executives because
           | they wanted to make nurses use their vacation time for sick
           | time if they got covid. Their explanation for this that if
           | the nurses got covid it was not likely from the hospital as
           | the hospital takes extreme precautions to prevent it. The
           | funny thing was that the same hospital spewing that BS also
           | wanted nurses to not wear mask due to possible shortages at
           | the beginning of covid. Insert the BS is to DAMN High meme
           | here.
           | 
           | 4. RaDonda Vaught's conviction. This is certainly not helping
           | the case to get more nurses.
        
             | PragmaticPulp wrote:
             | > My Wife is an ER nurse manager and while you have many
             | self entitled idiotic patients that think they are staying
             | in a resort versus visiting an ER, the patient satisfaction
             | surveys is not very high in regards to the issue and why
             | nurses are leaving.
             | 
             | ER is definitely a different ballgame. Thanks for the
             | additional perspective.
             | 
             | The patient satisfaction surveys apply more to domains
             | where repeat visits are the norm: Family doctor, nurse
             | practitioners, and so on. (Ideally, none of us becomes a
             | frequent customer of the ER nurses!)
        
             | ev0lv wrote:
             | >>4. RaDonda Vaught's conviction. This is certainly not
             | helping the case to get more nurses.
             | 
             | The precedent RaDonda's conviction set is far from
             | favorable to a profession which is already very difficult
             | and taxing. This is a BIG reason.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | mikkergp wrote:
           | I get what you're saying, but the promise of the medical
           | system and the implementation of the medical system aren't
           | really aligned. Sure 50% of problems are naive patients, but
           | the other 50% are doctors or a system that doesn't know how
           | to talk to you or treat you, or there's just an ocean of
           | uncertainty in how to operate. You show the negative side
           | from the doctor perspective, but on the other hand. Doctor's
           | aren't really trained in 'health' they're trained in
           | pathology. If you're really sick they can provide help, but
           | if you want to optimize or you're kind of sick, or your
           | numbers are borderline. Medicine is just sort of not a hard
           | science, there's way too much uncertainty. You mention people
           | demanding antibiotics, but the doctor's are just as bad --
           | last time I tried to have a nuanced discussion about it with
           | a practitioner, the answer was a simple "x days is the
           | standard of care". Not to mention that the doctors would have
           | to be up to date on the latest versions of research in a ton
           | of different areas to have some of those answers anyway. I'm
           | not going to leave terrible reviews about it, but I rarely
           | leave a medical office feeling satisfied that there are firm
           | answers on anything.
        
         | 77pt77 wrote:
         | > How doctors of all professions lost their professional agency
         | to do-nothing administrators within a generation is quite
         | puzzling and a bit terrifying to me.
         | 
         | Same thing with professors.
        
         | birdmanjeremy wrote:
         | I'm friends with quite a few nurses, primarily travel nurses,
         | and not a single one is considering a change in career that I
         | am aware of. Simply an anecdotal counterpoint and nothing more.
        
           | pc86 wrote:
           | Travel nurses are compensated quite a bit more in my
           | understanding. And the travel aspect means they can leave the
           | more toxic locations more easily.
        
             | phkahler wrote:
             | They're paid a shit ton more. And because of that, more
             | nurses are quitting to do the travel thing, which worsens
             | the shortage and increases demand for travel nurses ;-)
             | never seen an industry fuck itself over so bad. That's
             | really the issue - healthcare has become an industry, not a
             | profession.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | As you noted at the beginning of your comment, the issue
               | is the pay to quality of life at work ratio being too
               | low.
        
               | s1artibartfast wrote:
               | AT some point you hit diminishing returns on the pay/QAL
               | ratio.
               | 
               | IF the tradeoff is bad at 200k/yr, it wont be better at
               | 225k/yr or 250k/yr
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | Then increase the pay even more or increase the quality
               | of life at work.
               | 
               | Instead of $250k, halve the work load somehow and make it
               | two $125k.
               | 
               | If there is no number, then society cannot afford it.
               | 
               | But this is nursing, not trying to find ways around the
               | 2nd law of thermodynamics. If nurses received $300k/year
               | income, then there probably would not be a shortage since
               | the barrier to entry is not that high.
               | 
               | If we really want to get down to the nitty gritty of it,
               | most people cannot afford quality nurse care (or doctors
               | or hospitals). So the question really comes down to how
               | much wealth is society willing to redistribute to those
               | who need it in the form of healthcare?
        
               | s1artibartfast wrote:
               | Totally agree. With lowering wages and cranking out more
               | nurses. I think this is a more sustainable solution.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | t-3 wrote:
               | Sure, but nurses are more like 30-40k/yr. Plenty of room
               | for improvement.
        
               | ejb999 wrote:
               | >>Sure, but nurses are more like 30-40k/yr.
               | 
               | Not even close if you are talking about the USA (and
               | actual nurses, not CNA's or MAs) - starting pay for 2
               | year RN degrees near me are about 55-65K, and you easily
               | go over 100K in a few years.
        
               | s1artibartfast wrote:
               | The point is that I know nurses that make 200k a year and
               | still complain about the workload. More nurses and better
               | hours is the solution. Meanwhile the trend is to make it
               | more and more difficult to become a nurse and higher and
               | higher for hospitals to have nurses
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > Sure, but nurses are more like 30-40k/yr. Plenty of
               | room for improvement.
               | 
               | "Nurses" can be used to mean many things (CNAs,
               | LVNs/LPNs, RNs) but this is specifically RNs, who, make
               | much more than that, generally (median $77.6k/yr)
               | https://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/mobile/registered-
               | nurses....
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _median $77.6k /yr_
               | 
               | Given the amount of school a nurse must have, that's low.
        
               | ejb999 wrote:
               | 2 years of school to be an RN, 4 for BSN - it's not a lot
               | of school, it's an average amount of school at most.
        
               | BobbyJo wrote:
               | The market... finds a way.
        
               | joshgel wrote:
               | It's really amazing to see travel nurses come back to
               | work at a place they just left. They are now doing the
               | same job as before, are getting paid almost twice as much
               | with better schedules and are working next to people that
               | they know and are friends with.
               | 
               | It's honestly surprising that more haven't taken the jump
               | and is really shocking that hospitals aren't doing more
               | to retain critical staff.
        
               | TecoAndJix wrote:
               | The hospitals have been asking Biden to put a stop to it:
               | https://www.npr.org/2022/02/02/1077710203/hospitals-ask-
               | bide...
        
               | pc86 wrote:
               | It sounds nurses just need to be paid more, or travel
               | nurses need to be paid less. Equilibrium is probably
               | somewhere between the two extremes.
               | 
               | Apropos of nothing but why is the knee jerk reaction "we
               | need executive action to fix this _staffing problem_? "
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | Why would travel nurses need to be paid less?
        
               | pc86 wrote:
               | If wages equalized, it's unlikely they would all equalize
               | to the top of the range. It's more likely to be somewhere
               | in the top quartile or quintile.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | Why would they equalize? I assume there is a premium
               | required for not going back to one's own home everyday.
        
               | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
               | I can only react with this face: https://i.kym-
               | cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/112/480/Opo...
               | 
               | Help me understand this. Make it make sense...
               | 
               | 1. Hospitals pay their nurses $X, which is way too low
               | 
               | 2. Nurses quit because they're underpaid and overworked
               | 
               | 3. Hospitals have a nurse staffing crisis and so pay
               | travel nurses 2 * $X (or more!)
               | 
               | 4. Hospitals are in a panic over the cost of travel
               | nurses, yet instead of paying their nurses more to keep
               | them around and eliminate the need for travel nurses,
               | they ask the government to cap the cost of travel nurses
               | 
               | My mind is exploding over the ridiculousness of it.
        
               | zaptheimpaler wrote:
               | Its hilarious that nursing shares this problem with the
               | tech industry and probably with most other industries.
               | Every company is extremely allergic to giving raises and
               | is happy to let their workforce churn constantly. You
               | would think they believe that experience has no value.
               | 
               | But on the hiring side, experience is one of the most
               | widely accepted signals of value.
        
             | ProAm wrote:
             | A travel nurse means you just have to work across town you
             | dont have to travel out of state, out of country, or to
             | middle of nowhere. And these people are bringing in 5k a
             | week currently. None of them are leaving.
        
           | Eric_WVGG wrote:
           | Funny you should mention that... reading all of this, I was
           | thinking of a podcast interview with a nurse who was retiring
           | from hospital work. His primary reason for leaving was being
           | tired of fighting with hospital ownership and administration,
           | and was planning on switching to travel nursing which appears
           | to be more of a "gig" space.
           | 
           | He did consider that a career change, I think in the same
           | sort of way that a computer programmer like (presumably) most
           | of us would consider quitting Google to work on an indie app
           | or videogame development would be a career change.
           | 
           | The larger point is, medical professionals are bailing from
           | the hospital system, which looks pretty busted.
        
           | tubalcain wrote:
           | Travel nurses make six figures and get to sample choice cuts
           | from the local Tinder menu every time they take on a new job.
        
           | muh_gradle wrote:
           | I can add another data point. One of my mother's friends
           | works as a travel nurse. I don't envy her lifestyle, but she
           | seems to find that the compensation makes it worth her time.
        
           | drnonsense42 wrote:
           | The other responder said the same thing, but to add, a
           | traveling nurse I'm friends with , in Texas, gets paid 5k a
           | week if he chooses to work and chooses where he wants to
           | work. So again, this is like making a judgment about software
           | development working conditions by using people rest and
           | vesting at FAANG as an example.
        
           | rdtwo wrote:
           | A lot of nurses are becoming travel nurses because they will
           | get paid market rate
        
           | mfer wrote:
           | The travel nurse market is growing due to supply and demand
           | problems.
           | 
           | The demand for nurses is increasing as people are leaving and
           | there are more from the boomer generation hitting an age
           | where they need more care.
           | 
           | The supply has stayed the same. Schools local to me have not
           | increased output for various reasons (lack of instructors,
           | lack of space in local hospitals where nurses train, etc).
           | The supply is too low.
           | 
           | So, we have a supply and demand problem. Travel nurses get
           | paid a lot more because of this.
           | 
           | The solution is to produce more nurses. Something few are
           | talking about.
           | 
           | One of the local schools, to me, turned away half of
           | applicants because the program isn't increasing capacity.
        
             | jwagenet wrote:
             | No, the solution is to pay nurses better. There are already
             | tons of high quality nurses who don't want to do it anymore
             | because of poor pay in the face of demanding hospitals and
             | patients.
        
               | mfer wrote:
               | Pay is a problem. I don't disagree with that.
               | 
               | But, before COVID there was already a supply problem. The
               | supply problem has been slowly getting worse for years
               | and then COVID accelerated it. If every nurse came back
               | to working as a nurse who wanted to work there would
               | still be a supply problem.
               | 
               | Supply has not been growing to meet the demand growth for
               | years.
        
               | rightbyte wrote:
               | Poor pay? Judging by the nurses I have talked too in big
               | proper hospitals stress and scheduling are their main
               | concerns, not pay.
               | 
               | Obviously higher pay would increase their abuse
               | tolerance, but I think it is only part of the problem and
               | a short term solution since no amount of pay will offset
               | stress problems.
               | 
               | County level nurses seem to have much better work
               | conditions than hospital nurses.
        
               | sixothree wrote:
               | Nurses in outpatient offices haven't seen many of the pay
               | perks related to covid that hospital staff get, even
               | though they are still facing risk.
        
               | s1artibartfast wrote:
               | Strong disagree.
               | 
               | Nurses are generally payed very well. This is a supply
               | problem driven by increasing restrictions on nursing
               | degrees and insurance.
               | 
               | Not enough nurses and high cost leaves hospitals
               | understaffed and nurses overworked, leading to a feedback
               | cycle.
        
               | vkou wrote:
               | Travel nurses are paid well. Full-time nurses are not,
               | considering the amount of education they need, and the
               | difficulty of their work.
        
               | llbeansandrice wrote:
               | pay, benefits, and hours
               | 
               | I suppose you could just pay people more money to make it
               | worth it but the long hours take a toll in other ways as
               | well and contribute to burnout no matter how much you get
               | paid.
        
         | hedora wrote:
         | Also anecdotal, but we're looking for home healthcare for a
         | parent. There are zero in a 50+ mile radius.
         | 
         | One of their neighbors used to work for a home healthcare
         | company in the area.
        
       | agumonkey wrote:
       | I'm surprised how long and deep the medical bleeding has been
       | going. You'd think a vital organ bleeding would cause faster
       | reaction..
        
       | vonnik wrote:
       | I work at a startup* trying to tackle nurse burnout, and two of
       | my family members are nurses. Here are a few things I've learned:
       | 
       | - Nurses were getting burned out before the pandemic, and the US
       | has a nursing shortage that's been going on for about 90 years
       | (it started with an infrastructure buildout in the 1930s).* So
       | it's a secular problem, with chronic as well as acute causal
       | factors.
       | 
       | - There is a ladder of nursing credentials, and the shortage
       | effects them differently. Hiring for roles like CNA and LPN/LVN
       | has exploded because of the shortage of RNs and above. CNAs get
       | trained in 4-12 weeks to do the heavy lifting of care; RNs get ~3
       | year degrees to perform much more complicated tasks.
       | 
       | - Burnout, and the nursing shortage, are in a positive feedback
       | loop/downward spiral. That is, the more nurses burn out, the more
       | they cause other nurses to burn out. Short-staffed facilities
       | have a very hard time pulling back to normal staffing, because
       | nobody wants to join a skeleton crew. (I know of long-term care
       | facilities where the scheduling nurses (the bosses) are working
       | the graveyard shift because they can't fill it.)
       | 
       | - Many nurses work rigid schedules on 12-14 shifts, and a lot of
       | medical errors happen at the end of those shifts. **
       | 
       | - The hot US job market (Great resignation, great reshuffle) is
       | hitting nursing especially hard; it is very sensitive to external
       | shocks. There are paths to easier work and higher pay.
       | 
       | - Many healthcare facilities and systems don't give nurses
       | flexibility or the possibility of advancement. (One family member
       | will need to quit her current job and come back in a year or two
       | to her current employer if she wants to move up a pay grade --
       | which is like some tech companies -- but slower moving and lower
       | paying.)
       | 
       | - Many facilities are run entirely on foreign staff (the H2-B
       | visa allows that). And many nurses are imported from the
       | Philippines.
       | 
       | * https://clipboardhealth.com
       | 
       | * https://www.nursing.upenn.edu/nhhc/workforce-issues/where-di...
       | 
       | **
       | https://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000008158650/covid-...
       | 
       | (plug: if you're interested in this problem, we're hiring:
       | https://culture.clipboardhealth.com)
        
       | xkbarkar wrote:
       | Find it a bit amazing that so many here act as if the past two
       | years are the sole reason.
       | 
       | Few people have been as relentlessly toxic and unforgiving on
       | social media as nurses.
       | 
       | As a child of a nurse, that job has sucked for at least the past
       | 40 years. The pay is average. Workplace is a cesspool of gossip
       | and toxic work culture. Management is generally terrible. Also,
       | the pandemic has exposed how many in the profession really are
       | just narcissists.
       | 
       | The amount of facebook posts from indignant nurses spreading the
       | most horrible comments , just to receive likes and be perceived
       | as heroes, these past two years have made my stomach turn.
       | 
       | Its about time we cleaned up in healthcare. Not just aduquate
       | pay, making sure we properly manage healthcare professionals and
       | evolve healthcare management to grow where its needed.
       | 
       | I am 100% positive a flexible healthcare system that expands and
       | shrinks after societal need is possible.
       | 
       | Not this crazy old fashioned fixed set of beds for x or y, that
       | gets cut in some wave when they are needed less. Only to cause
       | havoc in years when they are needed more.
       | 
       | Make sure the good nurses dont burn out and quit leaving the
       | narcissist and ego maniacs behind.
       | 
       | There are amazing nurses out there, but we need to face that many
       | of them are absolute shit at their jobs. And should seek other
       | venues. This exodus may be a good thing in the end.
        
         | asdfasgasdgasdg wrote:
         | > This exodus may be a good thing in the end.
         | 
         | Hrmmm. Pretty sure if 90% of nurses actually left the
         | profession it would be a serious problem.
         | 
         | That being said, I would be surprised if this actually
         | happened. If even 5% left the profession would probably become
         | more lucrative, since pay would have to rise to retain those
         | who remain. Meanwhile, although nursing is not super highly
         | compensated, the alternatives for someone who has only a
         | nursing education and skillset will likely be worse. That may
         | lead to a gap in ideation about leaving vs actually leaving,
         | because the fact of the matter is that we all still have to put
         | food on the table.
        
       | everhard_ wrote:
       | This seems like a world-wide pattern, and it was already an issue
       | even before covid.[1] I'm curious about what alternatives they
       | have, may be joining newer tech-enabled companies with nursing
       | services, or going fully independent and work solely by their own
       | terms with some patreon-like app... ?? Or is it the case that
       | they are really sick of nursing and might prefer changing
       | professions or even unemployment?
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://www.icn.ch/system/files/2021-07/ICN%20Policy%20Brief...
        
       | andrewclunn wrote:
       | Meaningful Use, ICD-10, more and more top down "big data"
       | standards and approaches, that focus on qualitative data entry AS
       | care. I mean this literally: thanks Obama.
        
       | oversocialized wrote:
        
       | thenerdhead wrote:
       | My sister is a RN training to be a NP. Caring for others has
       | always been in her blood. But I can tell she's not happy over the
       | last few years (even prior to covid).
       | 
       | This survey has such a low number of responses to make any
       | meaningful conclusion from. 200 people surveyed. Non surprising
       | stats like 71% of respondents having 15+ years of experience
       | wanting to quit.
       | 
       | What really should be the lesson here is that capitalism does
       | what capitalism does best:
       | 
       | It cuts costs.
       | 
       | - More patients to nurse ratio (Simply unsafe given most medical
       | professionals already lack sleep)
       | 
       | - Little to no compensation relief on the way. (Huge boom of
       | travel nursing during pandemic)
       | 
       | - Excess job responsibilities (More paperwork/aid duties, less
       | actual nursing)
       | 
       | - New talent / old talent challenges (Larger incentive to switch
       | jobs, hard to properly train)
       | 
       | We better figure out something soon. The medical field feels like
       | it's holding on by a thread. Insurance companies run rampant with
       | no end in sight. Health care continues to increase in costs and
       | fail patients to the point of walking out or even dying to get
       | care.
       | 
       | While I think generally speaking, nurses like my sister just want
       | to feel appreciated like other jobs people are burning out in.
       | You can do that in many different ways:
       | 
       | - Don't overwork them.
       | 
       | - Don't underpay them.
       | 
       | - Don't give them unwanted responsibilities.
       | 
       | - Most importantly, listen to them.
       | 
       | I think you may find that people actually do love the profession
       | as it's one of the most noble professions out there, just that
       | they are being forced out of doing something they love because of
       | greed. Greed is not good.
        
       | adventured wrote:
       | Report: 90% of people want to stop working.
        
       | uf00lme wrote:
       | Poor pay, shift work, bad working conditions and multiple chances
       | of catching all kinds of diseases. Most nurses I know have above
       | average intelligence with an excellent work ethic. Just one
       | bootcamp away from a much better life.
       | 
       | So much sacrifice for the greater good, we the public are not
       | worth it.
       | 
       | Another profession I always think of are math teachers, they are
       | good people.
        
         | SomeCallMeTim wrote:
         | A bootcamp doesn't guarantee anything; without the right
         | aptitude and temperament the tech industry is just as
         | miserable, with a side of failure if you can't keep your jobs.
         | 
         | And no, "excellent work ethic" isn't enough.
        
         | germinalphrase wrote:
         | What non-technical bootcamps provide actual on-ramps into the
         | industry?
        
       | lexwraith wrote:
       | My wife was/is both an RN and a DNP in NYC during the entirety of
       | the pandemic. I'm an Iraq infantry veteran. Our experiences are
       | remarkably similar and there are major trends as to why there is
       | unsustainable turnover.
       | 
       | 1. Everyone pays lip service. People stand at airports and say
       | thank you for your service the same way they open their windows
       | at 7PM and start clapping and cheering during shift turnover.
       | Sometimes they'll say they know people who are veterans or
       | 'frontline healthcare workers' as a sign of solidarity
       | 
       | 2. Nobody actually wants to hear what you went through. Hearing
       | people die or knowing people are about to die in sometimes
       | painful, unfortunate ways is too raw for people to try to seek
       | out and understand, despite the fact that for a significant
       | portion of the population that's how we're going to go out, in a
       | hospital with all sorts of drugs pumped into our system
       | 
       | 3. There's a constant barrage of emotional/mental harm. Believe
       | it or not, you don't magically 'harden up' immediately.
       | Absorbing/witnessing drastic outcomes gets easier, but the burden
       | doesn't get lighter. This isn't to mention physical harm. People
       | do all sorts of things out of desperation and frustration.
       | 
       | 4. The systems that manage you are byzantine if not kafkaesque.
       | You're never sure how the decisions are made, yet you're the one
       | that will be paying the most for it. You know deep down that
       | you're just a number on a spreadsheet, and the only reason that
       | keeps you going is internal motivation to do what you think is
       | right, so you push on
       | 
       | 5. The people who can help rarely think about you. Very few
       | politicians will mention your name or your union that is doing
       | its best to get some kind of safe nurse:patient ratios or even
       | get the hospital to pay for your scrubs that they mandate. Very
       | few billionaires have mentioned healthcare workers or veterans at
       | all. As a whole, until someone has an emergency that threatens
       | their physical or financial status, healthcare and security is
       | treated as a black box with unreal expectations and extra
       | sensitivity to deviations from said expectations, despite a
       | complete lack of introspection and information on how those
       | expectations came to be
       | 
       | I don't know what the solution is. In healthcare, every system is
       | so deeply connected to the rest that destroying one or even
       | refactoring takes down everything else, and we need it to stay
       | online. The same applies to the continuation of geopolitics by
       | other means. You can give every IC the best EMR system, the best
       | rifle and radio, the best monitor/laptop/keyboard, but it's all
       | for nothing if the system as a whole is a dumpster fire. Her
       | frustration is palpable every time she finishes a rough shift
       | (probably 2 out of 3), and the best I can do is lend my ear and
       | pour a glass of wine.
       | 
       | That being said, I am grateful that she is continuing on the
       | path. Our shared experiences have brought us closer than ever.
        
       | springsprint wrote:
       | My wife works as a floater pharmacist in retail, can confirm, the
       | situation is quite similar and very dire. She cannot even get a
       | couple of days of UNPAID time-off when needed. The scheduler and
       | the management are quite abusive with the way how they treat
       | their staff. There is no such thing as a work-life balance.
        
       | civilized wrote:
       | This is a PR firm plant http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
       | 
       | In fact the entire website is probably a PR plant.
        
       | pbuzbee wrote:
       | Is this a shock?
       | 
       | - Demanding work: 12 hour shifts, irregular schedules, night
       | shifts, physically exhausting, limited breaks (including
       | bathroom/water!)
       | 
       | - High responsibility with unsafe conditions. You're literally
       | responsible for people's lives. Poor staffing ratios stretch you
       | thin and make you more likely to make mistakes. And if you make a
       | mistake, you're at huge risk for litigation... and now criminal
       | consequences too. Responsibilities, resources, and staffing
       | stretched even thinner due to the pandemic.
       | 
       | - Administration that treats you as something to be optimized and
       | does the absolute bare minimum to support you. Instead they tack
       | on additional tasks, expectations, and requirements ("no water at
       | a nurse's station!"). They encourage a culture where nurses
       | provide a concierge service to 'guests' instead of critical care
       | to patients.
       | 
       | - Hostile/entitled patients. I'd guess many/most patients are not
       | an issue, but it only takes a couple of difficult/combative
       | patients to really ruin your conditions.
       | 
       | - Low pay given the responsibility and working conditions for
       | non-travel nurses. https://nurseslabs.com/nurse-
       | salary/#nurse_salaries_by_state Like many others pointed out
       | here, in tech I make way more than a nurse for a job that's less
       | demanding, has far lower stakes, and is of far less value to
       | society.
       | 
       | To me the blame lies mainly in middle/upper management, whose
       | role is to build and empower an effective workforce. If 90% of
       | your workers are considering leaving, you blew it.
        
         | tsol wrote:
         | The pay was good enough last year, what changed? In my opinon
         | nursing has always been a difficult job, yet they've always had
         | people lining up to become nurses. So it must be more than just
         | 'the job is too demanding'.
        
           | anonporridge wrote:
           | Pure speculation, but if I had to hazard a guess, it's
           | because the job is becoming increasingly inhumane.
           | 
           | More and more, nurses have to act like robots to remain in
           | compliance, and that's not what any of them signed up for,
           | and the increasing lack of intangible reward that comes from
           | caring for people and creating a human connection, means they
           | demand more explicit monetary reward for temporarily
           | suppressing their humanity to do the job.
        
       | goodpoint wrote:
       | Can we stop posting posting US-related stuff without a clear tag
       | in the title?
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | fumeux_fume wrote:
       | Of course the answer to this problem is more optimization and AI.
       | Lol, wtf website is this?
        
       | johndhi wrote:
       | I've worked in healthcare law for a few years and I think the
       | problem boils down to how it's regulated.
       | 
       | It's super, duper complex with lots of paperwork. The complexity
       | is too great to run a small practice, the Medicare/Medicaid fees
       | are too small to make up for it, and it increases the importance
       | of administrators in the hospital system.
       | 
       | If I had a bunch of time I'd love to go through and write up a
       | proposed alternative approach, and congressional bill -- but I
       | have to imagine even if I did that, no one would listen to it.
        
       | artur_makly wrote:
       | I'm sure Elon has a solution for this in 2023.
        
       | nameless912 wrote:
       | Anecdotally, many of my partner's coworkers have been on the
       | school setting therapist -> hospital setting therapist -> burnt
       | out craft store employee pipeline over the last couple of years,
       | and my partner is desperate to join them once we have enough
       | savings to allow her to quit her job. This is within the
       | Speech/Language, Physical, and Occupational Therapist realm, so
       | not nurses exactly, but it's similarly bad for a lot of medical-
       | adjacent jobs right now.
        
       | nfriedly wrote:
       | My mom was a RN (Registered Nurse) for 30+ years. She quit doing
       | what most people think of as "being a nurse" about 10-15 years
       | ago and switched to related work (home checkups, teaching,
       | medical billing, etc.) because of how stressful and demanding
       | working the floor in a hospital was.
       | 
       | Last year she retired from the profession entirely, a few years
       | ahead of "normal retirement age", and now she works part-time at
       | a local farm/fruit stand. The main things that drove her to
       | retire early was management insisting on 12 hour shifts and not
       | hiring enough staff.
        
         | tssva wrote:
         | 12 hour shifts have long been the standard for nurses in a
         | hospital setting. A full-time hospital nurse usually works 3 12
         | hour shifts in a week.
        
           | nfriedly wrote:
           | Yes, you're right, and there are some reasonable arguments
           | for it. But I'm not convinced that it's the optimal solution
           | for all situations.
           | 
           | I my mom's case, she was mostly doing paperwork, so many of
           | the arguments weren't as applicable. She had done 8 or 10
           | hour shifts for a while and found that she really preferred
           | it (and was staying on top of her work), but then a different
           | manager was brought in that forced everyone back onto the
           | "standard" 12 hour shifts.
        
       | geocrasher wrote:
       | Nurses have an extremely hard job. Before my wife died, she spent
       | days to weeks at at time in hospitals over and over again. She
       | went out of her way to show them kindness despite her suffering,
       | and they always thanked her for it. Most patients treat them like
       | _slaves_ and are even abusive toward them- at the very least,
       | thankless. COVID only made this worse. It 's no wonder they are
       | leaving in droves.
        
       | jmyeet wrote:
       | The number of people in the US who continue to defend the
       | abhorrent health insurance system is absolutely mind-boggling.
       | The level of brainwashing that pervades discourse about single-
       | payer health insurance being some sort of communist plot is
       | testament to some of th emost successful propaganda of all time.
       | 
       | What's worse is it belies an ugly aspect of human nature
       | (particularly pervasive in the US IME) that people absolutely do
       | not give a fuck about anyone else when it comes down to it. As
       | long as someone is fortunate enough to have decent health
       | insurance through their job, people who don't are lazy.
       | 
       | The big picture here is that the wealthy want people dependent on
       | jobs and to be in debt (eg student debt) because it makes them
       | compliant.
       | 
       | So I'm not surprised nurses are leaving. Insurance companies make
       | providing healthcare an absolutely miserable business and
       | deliberately killing people ("prior authorizations", "pre-
       | existing conditions", etc) should not be the basis for commercial
       | enterprise. Denying someone life-saving or life-changing care
       | should not be a profit motive.
       | 
       | What's worse is that a lot of the burnout is effectively caused
       | by people who are profoundly selfish and are voluntarily choosing
       | to get sick and die of what is now a highly preventible disease.
       | 
       | It's a hard situation because people depend on nurses so
       | collectively they're torn. Teachers OTOH aren't life-critical
       | (but still obviously important) so I'd actually like to see them
       | make a mass exodus over all the right-wing censorship they're
       | facing in most states.
        
         | fundad wrote:
         | Yeah it's wild how well the grift works. My coworkers want
         | private insurance (because we get it) and oppose universal
         | healthcare. I think generally people in the states are ok with
         | a grift if it hurts poor people worse. Because of that
         | literally everyone expects they are getting grifted at all
         | times and trusts no one.
        
       | Ericson2314 wrote:
       | There should be strikes until we get medicare for all. Simple as
       | that.
        
       | lucidone wrote:
       | I have family members who work in health care here in Canada. The
       | fact that their wages are subject to regulation (e.g., they are
       | effectively getting a paycut this year with inflation), they
       | realistically cannot strike to improve their working conditions
       | (people will die), and that their work is very demanding
       | (physical labour, emotional labour, shift work, constantly
       | understaffed) makes this an unsurprising statistic from my
       | anecdotal experience.
        
       | Footkerchief wrote:
       | Is that 90% figure new, or has it been the case in past years?
        
       | gagan2020 wrote:
       | Why no one talking about survey size of 200 nurses of particular
       | area only
        
       | AviationAtom wrote:
       | How are more people not sounding alarms about the future of our
       | society with more bleak headlines like this? I fear we have
       | become far too reactive to many problems that should have been
       | anticipated, and planned for.
        
       | Zeetah wrote:
       | Wonder if this is a US phenomenon or a global phenomenon?
        
         | thg wrote:
         | It's about the same here in Germany.
         | 
         | Source: Got nurses in the family.
        
       | bezospen15 wrote:
       | How do we reduce the cost of health care while simultaneously
       | paying nurses more?
        
       | jmugan wrote:
       | A lot of us are saying we need to increase the pay of nurses, but
       | we also believe that medical care is too expensive. So, where is
       | all that money going? There are a lot of flippant answers but
       | they never seem to lead anywhere actionable.
        
         | eksx wrote:
         | One example is drug waste. Insulin for example is charged per
         | vial to the patient but usually only a minimal fraction is
         | actually used and the remainder is disposed of.
        
           | jeffrallen wrote:
           | And then the patient is charged a disposal fee.
        
         | jrochkind1 wrote:
         | I am not sure, and I'm not saying this is the WHOLE problem (in
         | fact I am confident it is not), but... in 2017 (first hit I got
         | googling) 7.9% of all healthcare expenditure in the USA ($275
         | billion) went to insurance overhead, vs 2.8% in Canada.
         | 
         | But yeah, in general, this is a problem (healthcare in general,
         | healthcare expenses, nurse job experience) where almost all
         | other countries with similar wealth are doing so much better
         | than us, it shouldn't be _that_ mysterious to solve it, right?
         | It 's not like, who knows if it's even possible to do better!
         | Like, we know it is... figuring out what the difference between
         | them and us isn't trivial, but it should be easier than
         | something there isn't a model for.
         | 
         | The most obvious difference would seem to be how insurance (and
         | universal coverage thereof) is handled.
        
           | orwin wrote:
           | In France, 18% to 22% of the money given to our public
           | insurance is used for administrative stuff, which i thought
           | was a lot. Then I learned that 31% of what my company pays
           | for my private insurance is used for administrative purpose.
           | So either private companies are way less efficient than
           | public service, or i should immediately buy shares from
           | Swisslife and others.
           | 
           | Guess what my first major investment was?
        
         | ciphol wrote:
         | It goes to treating crises (expensive) rather than preventing
         | them (cheap)
        
       | shantnutiwari wrote:
       | The article seems to focus too much on : How can IT fix this
       | problem?
       | 
       | Ugggh, maybe it can't? As the main problems seem to be political,
       | not tech related?
       | 
       | You might as well ask how IT can be used to fix homelessness or
       | police brutality?
        
         | bell-cot wrote:
         | My last experience in a hospital was Dec'21. ICU, at an old
         | friend's bedside, in a large (500+ beds, "teaching") hospital
         | that is part of a big (50+ hospitals) chain.
         | 
         | The nurses seemed excellent...but the amount of time and
         | emotional energy they had to put into dealing with multiple
         | computerized systems - just within my friend's room, to replace
         | an empty IV bag - was staggering. The "smart" IV pump was the
         | worst - a crappy little display, a minimized number of flaky
         | buttons as the only interface, and the nurse had to drill down
         | into multiple sub-sub-sub menu's to do even basic stuff.
         | 
         | My first thought was that you could triple nurse productivity
         | (as in "care given to sick humans") if you had two IT tech's
         | following each nurse around, tasked with doing all the "re-
         | redundant data entry & dealing with computerized shit" that had
         | obviously become the nurse's primary job.
         | 
         | My second thought was that interfaces which the nurse had to
         | deal with should be restricted to 1950's-industrial-control-
         | panel style - nothing but well-labeled, single-purpose physical
         | buttons, switches, & dials. And the data entry that they had to
         | do was restricted to wax pencils on well-laminated paper -
         | which could be fed to a scanner, to update the patient records
         | database. ( _Displays_ , say of vital signs & such, could be
         | fancy. But the "50's control panel" rule could put an end to
         | "oh, that information is hidden down in a sub-sub-sub-menu
         | here..." shit.)
        
       | ed_balls wrote:
       | The average ago of nurses went from 46 to 55 in my country. The
       | current retirement age is 60.
        
       | detcader wrote:
       | because the headline can never be "90% of nurses' employers fail
       | their employees this year"
        
         | TOMDM wrote:
         | Well yeah, because it's reporting on a survery of nurses which
         | included a question about whether they're considering leaving
         | the profession.
         | 
         | I think your would be headline is a fair inference to come to,
         | though not the sole cause.
         | 
         | With how over sensationalised our media is, can we avoid
         | complaining when headlines actually directly match the thing
         | they're reporting on for once?
        
       | fitba72 wrote:
       | In my experience, most nurses come in, socialise and cheer you
       | up, take your blood pressure and temperature with automated
       | devices, that one can buy for home use, and give you medicines
       | that a doctor has prescribed (someone can also can do at home if
       | they are feeling up to it). This is a wonderful profession and
       | they should be highly paid but do they really need a bachelor's
       | degree or master's degree to do this job? Some specialised nurses
       | can even draw blood but, again in my experience, many of those
       | were unable to "find a vein" and had to call on someone more
       | experienced or a doctor. Pretty sure some experienced heroin
       | users could do a better job at this. Just my experience.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | shadowofneptune wrote:
         | Where a less credentialed person can do the job it has already
         | been done. Here's how it breaks down:
         | 
         | Registered Nurse (RN): The 'specialized nurses' you talk of,
         | and what this article is mainly about. Requires at least an
         | associate's degree to be licensed, but increasingly an
         | bachelor's is expected. Only they can administer any medication
         | a doctor prescribes, and only they can assess your condition.
         | 
         | Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN): If they are certified they can
         | also do blood draws. Requires graduation from an LPN program
         | (usually about one year) to be licensed. They perform easily
         | predicted tasks like a dressing change that do not require
         | assessment. They can also administer some drugs based on the
         | situation.
         | 
         | Unlicensed Assistive Personnel (UAP): In a big hospital, these
         | are who are checking your temperature most of the time. They
         | can only do basic tasks that do not require any medical
         | training, even if their experience is larger than the RNs and
         | LPNs they're under.
         | 
         | There are also many different technicians. In a big hospital,
         | an RN acts as a middle manager delegating their work to these
         | many different tiers. In an ICU, or in a small hospital, it
         | will be done much more by themselves.
        
       | theguyovrthere wrote:
       | Nurses leaving the field is only part of the larger problem.
       | 
       | Nursing educators aren't exactly a dime a dozen. The average age
       | of a masters prepared nursing educator in the us ranges between
       | 56-62. Doctorally prepared is higher. The country is facing a
       | nursing shortage, and a nursing educator shortage.
       | 
       | Now my doctor has an interesting theory that some of the pain
       | points for nurses is being created by the hospital systems and
       | industry themselves as an excuse to say we dont have enough
       | nurses and bring in nurses from other countries like the
       | Philippines, as they'll be glad to come to the US and work for
       | less, and will be so grateful for the opportunity that they'll go
       | along with whatever the hospital says they need to do. (This was
       | in the context of vaccines.)
       | 
       | The other thing that has nurses worked up is recently is this
       | case: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/radonda-vaught-nurse-guilty-
       | dea...
        
       | jrochkind1 wrote:
       | There's even more in here beyond the headline about nurse
       | satisfaction.
       | 
       | USA healthcare pretty broken, and sliding into catastrophe. Nurse
       | dissatisfaction is just the tip of the iceberg, or the canary in
       | the coalmine.
       | 
       | > Eighty-four percent of emergency room nurses and 96% of
       | intensive care or critical care nurses have a 4:1 ratio, which is
       | double the optimal target of 2:1.
       | 
       | > Thirty-six percent of nurses said they've seen patients with
       | acute health conditions walk out of the ER because of the wait
       | times for an inpatient bed. And 37% said that surgeries had to be
       | rescheduled because of bed shortages.
        
       | sujitjadhav wrote:
       | Time to bring Robots faster.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | djohnston wrote:
         | I would expect robots to replace physicians before nurses for
         | the same reason I'd expect them to replace architects before
         | plumbers.
        
         | manuelabeledo wrote:
         | So my Roomba still gets stuck under the sofa, and robots still
         | cannot make a full lunch, but they will replace nurses? Yeah,
         | good luck with that.
        
       | fallingfrog wrote:
       | Never seen an industry that needed unions more.
        
       | susrev wrote:
       | They surveyed "more than 200 hospital registered nurses based in
       | the U.S.". Does this small of a sample size truly reflect the
       | feelings of the ~2.4 million (2019) registered RN's in the US?
       | 
       | That is 0.00008 % of all RN's in the US.
        
       | stakkur wrote:
       | I work for a major healthcare provider (thousands of nurses) and
       | while there's a lot of unhappiness, nowhere near '90%' are
       | considering leaving.
       | 
       | And really, this is a red herring; the real problem started long
       | before COVID. This video essay nails it (or so care practitioners
       | at my workplace say, anyway):
       | https://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000008158650/covid-...
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | sllewe wrote:
       | Using an anecdotal source - My Wife (ICU RN) this is sounds
       | right.
       | 
       | Outside of the existing issues with Bedside nursing (long days,
       | physically demanding) - the primary issue is staffing. Pre-
       | pandemic the ratios were already bad but now many are leaving for
       | travel contracts which carry significantly better wages. It
       | quickly becomes a loop where employees leave for Travel
       | Contracts, and then can only be backfilled with Travel Contracts.
       | The remaining FT staff nurses are left making much less money,
       | and have to assist "training" with the outside Travel nurses. And
       | while this is nothing against them - The travel RNs also often
       | have a different "vibe" as they are much less focused on long
       | term improvement or problem solving within the Unit.
       | 
       | Also ICU/PCU/ER nursing throughout the pandemic was a terribly
       | depressing place to be. Leaving many of my Wifes colleagues
       | (including herself) with what is essentially PTSD with little or
       | no support from the Hospital System.
        
         | durrden wrote:
         | My wife (ER/Trauma RN) feels the same way. They will need to
         | double the pay of non-travel nurses to get through this.
        
           | alostpuppy wrote:
           | The existence of travel nurses should really be indicative of
           | a problem.
        
             | pmulard wrote:
             | Travel nurses serve a need, like if another nurse gets
             | injured or has a child, and they will need to be
             | temporarily replaced.
        
               | solenoidalslide wrote:
               | Shouldn't travel positions exist for every other
               | profession?
               | 
               | The reason why it's expected for nursing in particular is
               | the indicator that something here is very wrong.
        
             | InitialLastName wrote:
             | Should it? The market for medical care has a base rate (and
             | appears to be clearly under-staffed for that rate), but
             | (especially in a pandemic) it's rather peaky and the basic
             | skills appear to be VERY transferable from location to
             | location. If there are people with the skills that are
             | willing to travel, it seems that a system that maintained
             | maximum capacity in all locations would be a very wasteful
             | one.
        
               | alimov wrote:
               | Yes, it should be indicative of a problem. The fact that
               | nurses are overworked, and underpaid is a big issue.
               | 
               | > If there are people with the skills that are willing to
               | travel, it seems that a system that maintained maximum
               | capacity in all locations would be a very wasteful one.
               | 
               | The general idea here is that more and more nurses are
               | willing to do this because they are underpaid and
               | overworked in their regular (non-Travel Nurse) positions.
               | I didn't see anyone arguing for "maximum capacity"
               | either... just better wages and working conditions.
               | 
               | > basic skills appear to be VERY transferable from
               | location to location
               | 
               | If you read the parent comment by sllewe you will see
               | that there are other costs and concerns around this which
               | do more to stress existing nurses at whatever hospital is
               | being filled with travel nurses. Imagine training a new
               | someone every week (or however often new travel nurses
               | pop up) while also having to do your own job...
               | especially when you are already being overworked and when
               | a miscalculation on your part could result in loss of
               | life. All the while knowing that the travel nurse is
               | making significantly more money than you, negotiated
               | their hours of availability and doesn't have to care
               | about the unit beyond whatever contract length they
               | signed up for..
        
       | mansilladev wrote:
       | As the son of a retired nurse, I can tell you that this has been
       | true since the dawn of the nursing profession.
        
       | sonicggg wrote:
       | Nurses complain about their work conditions, but I don't
       | understand them. They had this massive leverage during the
       | pandemic to discuss improvements. Some people may say "Oh but it
       | is illegal for nurses to strike in country X", but what will
       | governments and companies realistically do if all nurses decide
       | to stop, arrest everyone and let the health system collapse? Not
       | a reasonable option.
       | 
       | There's just something masochist about their profession.
        
         | d4mi3n wrote:
         | Legalities aside, how would you feel about refusing to work for
         | poor pay/conditions if you knew for a fact that said decision
         | would result in many deaths?
         | 
         | Not a chance, not a speculation, but absolute awareness of the
         | number of patients that will not receive care and likewise will
         | die as a result.
         | 
         | I don't think it's fair to blame nurses for poor treatment when
         | they have a multitude of terrible options to pursue in order to
         | improve their working conditions.
        
         | belval wrote:
         | It's unfortunate to see this downvoted because I've heard this
         | sentiment echo'ed a lot and I think it's worth explaining.
         | 
         | It's not about the illegality, it's really just about people
         | dying. Yes you can go on a strike but your patient that's in
         | critical condition won't survive on principle. You could say
         | "just don't care about the patient and strike anyway", but
         | that's extremely hard to do.
         | 
         | Striking when it hurts some millionaire owner is one thing, you
         | wouldn't feel bad about yourself. Striking when it hurts
         | someone post-op who did nothing wrong aside from being sick
         | isn't noble, you get to live with the fact that as an
         | individual you could have saved them, yet you didn't because
         | you wanted money.
        
         | sonzohan wrote:
         | It seems like your comment would be better directed towards
         | weak or absent nurse unions, instead of individuals. I had
         | countless nurse and physician friends go to their hospital
         | directors/HR/managers during the pandemic "I need a raise
         | because I have absorbed the load of 3 other workers and am
         | working harder than ever." Not only were they refused, many
         | instead received 10-33% pay cuts, with hospitals citing
         | increased Opex costs despite decreased staffing, significant
         | government assistance, and increased volunteer (0-cost) help.
         | 
         | It'd also be enlightening for people in this thread to have
         | hospital executives explain how they have some of the highest
         | patient numbers in history yet they're hemorrhaging so much
         | money their physicians had to take pay cuts.
         | 
         | Nurses, due to their profession having relatively low barriers
         | to entry yet requiring years of operational knowledge to truly
         | be effective, need collective bargaining. Nurses do strike, and
         | nurse strikes are actively occurring on the U.S. West Coast.
         | However, the unions they represent are small and have little
         | power overall. For a strike to be successful you need
         | solidarity from a majority of workers in the area you want to
         | impact. You also need buy-in from the hospital/region that
         | union nurses will provide superior care to non-union nurses.
         | Something that's hard to do when your average executive thinks
         | that the most complicated thing a nurse does is sticking a
         | patient.
        
         | Ensorceled wrote:
         | It's more a lack of psychopathy in the profession. If nurses in
         | Ontario had gone on strike two months ago, a lot of extra
         | people would have died.
        
           | sonicggg wrote:
           | I know Ontario all too well. The same people that depend on
           | nurses won't do more than needlessly beat pots and pans for
           | their "heros". They do not even support them with their
           | votes, which put in power the nefarious Conservative party.
           | Who exactly are the nurses standing for? People that won't
           | have their back.
        
             | TOMDM wrote:
             | I think there's some middle ground between "Hey, we need
             | some more support, our conditions suck" and "Fuck it, we'll
             | let the sick die I guess"
        
       | bsedlm wrote:
       | at some point, somehow, medical care stopped revolving about
       | 'healing' and medicine became all about 'treating'.
       | 
       | the health of the patient became subordinate to the economic
       | incentives of the hospitals and the other involved institutions
       | (insurance providers, pharmaceutical corporations, etc...)
       | 
       | and so I have the hypothesis that this happened because people
       | (young adults) going into medicine because of a vocation to help
       | and heal others become disheartened when they find out it's all
       | about institutional profit; only them who get into this becuase
       | "doctors make good money" really make it to the end (which is not
       | terrible, as they usually do learn the methods and techniques of
       | medicine, but that in the long run prioritize money over health).
       | 
       | health care should have never been allowed to become a capitalist
       | marketplace.
        
       | screye wrote:
       | Not to be mean, but 'leave nursing' and then what ?
       | 
       | Nursing is a well paying middle-class job without a lot of
       | transferable skills to other professions. Don't say programming.
       | It isn't the solution to everything. Other low-entry-barrier jobs
       | pay much less and have exploitation problems of their own. For a
       | lot of middle class families, dual income is essential to
       | maintain their lifestyle. So SAHM is not an option. Nursing has
       | clearly gone through a rough 2 years, but I suspect that things
       | are going back to normal now. Why leave now ?
       | 
       | > High patient-to-nurse staffing ratios
       | 
       | This bit is confusing me. If supply-demand is in the Nurse's
       | favor, then don't they get more leverage on what QOL and wages
       | they can demand ? It is not like they can fire a senior nurse on
       | low pay, when new nurses are harder to find and demand higher
       | wages. I know that the nurses refusing work and resulting deaths
       | has bad optics, but it doesn't look like hospitals have a lot of
       | leverage right now.
       | 
       | > Administrative burden and manual tasks
       | 
       | Sounds like an opportunity for a startup to disrupt the space.
       | But, the jaded side of me thinks that the startup will fail due
       | to insufficient political leverage with hospitals/insurance/law-
       | makers.
       | 
       | > health IT
       | 
       | Keep calling it health IT and the problems will never be solved.
       | Solving hard problems needs reframing of the resources dedicated
       | to it. When tech workers are seen as assets and not cost-centers,
       | these problems will solve themselves.
        
         | kerbs wrote:
         | > 'leave nursing' and then what
         | 
         | When we got married, my wife (Physicians Assistant) made
         | handily more than I did. $140k to my $82k midwest, software
         | development job.
         | 
         | 10 years later, she makes $130k (after cutting hours back) and
         | I make $4-500k as a software engineer in the midwest. The two
         | markets crossed _drastically_
         | 
         | Where are they going?
         | 
         | For us, home.
        
           | screye wrote:
           | > I make $4-500k as a software engineer in the midwest
           | 
           | This is a massive outlier though. In your case, the exception
           | proves the rule.
           | 
           | The rule: "The 1% of Nurses that found a partner in the US
           | top 1 percentile will be able to quit their job."
        
           | jewayne wrote:
           | $500K as a software engineer? That's the very tip of the
           | unicorn's horn. My friend works as a CEO of a (smallish)
           | software company and makes half that.
        
             | peanuty1 wrote:
             | This forum almost certainly skews heavily towards people in
             | Silicon Valley or working at Bay Area companies. AKA the
             | very highest earning people in tech.
        
         | titanomachy wrote:
         | "If supply-demand is in the Nurse's favor, then don't they get
         | more leverage on what QOL and wages they can demand?"
         | 
         | I have a family member who works in public health and is trying
         | to staff nursing positions. She has something like a $400k
         | budget to hire 4 nurses at $100k each (let's say). She is
         | unable to fill the positions because cost of living in her area
         | has gone up so much. She'd rather have 2 nurses at $200k each
         | instead of zero nurses, but she's simply not allowed to do
         | that. She's trying to change policy but it's a massive uphill
         | battle.
         | 
         | Power's concentrated very high up in health care, and it's
         | exercised through the use of rigid policies. It certainly seems
         | like nurses should command higher wages, but the bureaucracy
         | has become very effective at preventing basically anything from
         | changing quickly.
        
         | warner25 wrote:
         | I was thinking the same as your first point. I'm a career
         | military officer and know a lot of military families[1]. My
         | observation is that the spouses who are doctors and nurses are
         | the only ones who can reliably find middle-class employment.
         | Becoming a nurse is much easier than becoming a doctor, and
         | pays much better than other common things like retail, food
         | service, house cleaning, and photography (probably more of a
         | hobby).
         | 
         | [1] The labor participation and employment rates for military
         | spouses (especially when adjusted for age and education) are so
         | low that they're almost off the charts. The causes are frequent
         | cross-country moves to economically struggling locations, and
         | an extreme need for flexible schedules (e.g. for when service
         | members get deployed and spouses become de facto single
         | parents). Medicine seems to be unique in that it's everywhere,
         | always hiring, and often allows for part-time employment.
        
         | raydev wrote:
         | > Nursing is a well paying
         | 
         | Only in a vaccuum. It pays far worse than other jobs at the
         | same rate given the effort and stress the job entails.
         | 
         | > don't they get more leverage on what QOL and wages they can
         | demand ?
         | 
         | Sure, but it needs to get far worse. The hospitals are only
         | going to budge once walkouts are organized. But that can't
         | happen without strong unions, most nurses just need to pay the
         | bills which is why they continue to put up with it.
         | 
         | I'm not sure you understand who has the leverage. The hospitals
         | can let healthcare deteriorate far beyond current expectations.
         | They still get paid in the end. The environment for patients
         | and nurses will only get worse.
        
           | BeetleB wrote:
           | > It pays far worse than other jobs at the same rate given
           | the effort and stress the job entails.
           | 
           | Depends on location. Most professions I know with that much
           | effort and stress get paid a lot less than $100K, which is
           | the median nurse pay in my area. Amazon pays a lot less.
        
           | kerbs wrote:
           | > don't they get more leverage on what QOL and wages they can
           | demand ?
           | 
           | Following up on this apart from my reply above, my
           | observation is instead of raising pay they simply let roles
           | languish. It's bizarre.
           | 
           | But then again it feels like that's what happens when
           | nursing/AP care is treated as a cost center. It seems like
           | they aren't concerned with addressing a market as much as
           | keeping cost/income the same as it has always been.
        
           | eftychis wrote:
           | What I read here instead is that the American people is fine
           | with deteriorating healthcare, and will not regulate the
           | industry, nor burst into a walkout of their own.
           | 
           | I find it cheaper to fly back to Europe and pay out of pocket
           | (uninsured) for anything non-trivial along with my flight
           | ticket than pay for California services. Only two things I
           | miss: a) nicely decorated clinics and nurses taking my vitals
           | and information instead of the doctor b) heart attack or
           | stroke chance while reading the bill.
           | 
           | (Of course, I have the advantage of having people to stay
           | with. Perhaps, Airbnb will start offering health services
           | that way soon.)
           | 
           | /s
           | 
           | Seriously, we need to start looking as health care for its
           | value as health care and not a money grab; we pay enough
           | taxes to have a hospital running without the fear of
           | profitability I believe -- in California at least.
        
             | jewayne wrote:
             | Honestly, unless they're not in the midst of fighting a
             | serious illness, most Americans just want to be sure that
             | they have access to better healthcare than the people below
             | them in the socioeconomic ladder. They're fine with
             | healthcare deteriorating, as long as it deteriorates at
             | least as much for the guy below them.
             | 
             | Now, if a serious illness comes along, some people do wake
             | up and realize it's not a f*cking game. But certainly not
             | all.
        
       | sebow wrote:
       | No surprise at all. A lot of unnecessary stress (yes, more than
       | enough, even for a pandemic) and the top-down approach of the
       | institutions really broke the trust of the public in many
       | healthcare systems worldwide. I think the sentiment would be the
       | same even if wages would be raised (and in many cases they have
       | been).
       | 
       | Considering it was bothersome for both healthcare workers and the
       | public, in my opinion the friction is more between the healthcare
       | workers and management/government entities (& their policies)
       | rather than "some patient bothered me" cases.
        
       | TYPE_FASTER wrote:
       | I'm a software engineer. My wife is a RN. It's been interesting
       | over the past 20+ years to see the parallels in two different
       | markets. Temporary staffing is used to fill vacant reqs. Gradual
       | erosion of employer provided benefits.
        
       | giantg2 wrote:
       | "... poor processes, along with inefficient operational workflows
       | and administrative burden are key drivers of frustration and
       | burnout among ..." [insert job here]
       | 
       | This is pretty much universal in my experience. As a dev, it
       | always seems to boil down to these. It's amazing how the business
       | doesn't know their processes, can't document them accurately, or
       | simply don't care to analyze and document them. Garbage
       | requirements become a garbage system.
        
       | Blackstone4 wrote:
       | Might be similar for teachers...I know many have cut back hours
       | to part time where they can or are considering leaving. They are
       | having to fill in for staff absenses and are stressed.
        
       | mattmaroon wrote:
       | It's a lot easier to say you will leave your profession than to
       | actually do it, so I don't expect anywhere near 90% to be true.
       | But it won't take that many to leave before it becomes a severe
       | problem. The industry will be forced to reckon with this. We
       | can't not have nurses and healthcare is basically an infinitely
       | large industry (people will spend all of their money to stay
       | alive) so I'm sure it will be improved.
        
       | t_mann wrote:
       | If there ever was a contrarian move then it'd be for an 18-year-
       | old to start nurse training now. Probably one of the last
       | professions at all to be hit by automation, practically
       | guaranteed demand for skilled labour and a hefty shortage thereof
       | in the making.
        
       | retr0nerd wrote:
       | Get ready for another dark age. The destruction of education and
       | medicine in this country means plague doctors will be making a
       | return. Better check with your HMO to make sure your policy
       | covers them.
        
       | ubermonkey wrote:
       | A good friend of mine was a nurse practitioner in cancer care
       | here for 17 years, and quit last year to do contract work in
       | interesting places. She's unmarried, no kids, etc., so I think
       | it's a little bit of a "shake things up" thing but also a little
       | bit "make hay while the sun shines."
       | 
       | Her most recent gig was in Antarctica. I mean, cool, right?
        
         | post-it wrote:
         | I would love to spend a winter at the south pole station. The
         | biggest downside of being able to do my job remotely means I'll
         | never get sent to cool places. :(
        
           | pmulard wrote:
           | It's even better. You can send yourself to cool places :)
        
       | jimmar wrote:
       | A family member just quit her nursing job because she refused to
       | learn yet another system. She was great with patients but could
       | not stand the computer systems she had to use.
        
         | brimble wrote:
         | I feel like quitting _receiving healthcare_ when a provider
         | switches their records systems or adds a new one and I have to
         | input all the same shit _yet again_ (what the _fuck_ is even
         | the point of digital medical records? They can 't keep even the
         | most basic info straight anyway!), so I can only imagine what
         | that's like for the people who have to work with it daily.
        
       | throw8383833jj wrote:
       | Here's my naive understanding of the situation:
       | 
       | It sounds like they're just being overworked. So, just have the
       | nurses take a 20 minute break every 2 hours, to go out and take a
       | walk. The hospital can require it if it comes to that but why
       | wouldn't they just want to do it? and if the hospital doesn't
       | want to do it, then the nurses should insist on it and walk off
       | the job if not given their breaks. I would imagine the hospital
       | would rather agree to 20 min breaks every 2 hours rather than
       | loosing 90% of their workforce forever: they don't have a choice,
       | they have to agree.
        
         | defterGoose wrote:
         | Well, at least you're aware that it's a naive understanding...
        
           | throw8383833jj wrote:
           | why doesn't collective bargaining work in this scenario? if
           | the demand for nurse labor is so incredibly high, they should
           | have a lot more bargaining power, no?
        
       | airstrike wrote:
       | Compared to what % historically? If you don't give me historical
       | trends, I don't know what to make of this one data point.
        
       | mberning wrote:
       | My wife worked bedside at a nationally ranked childrens hospital
       | for 5+ years. She left recently for private practice and loves
       | it. More money, less stress, better management. The list goes on.
       | Bedside nurses are often not paid very well, are treated poorly
       | by patients, and even more poorly by administrators. The
       | hospital's motto should be "anything for the patient, nothing for
       | our employees".
        
       | saos wrote:
       | Not surprised. Cost of living is at an all time high whilst wages
       | have stagnated. Atleast thats the problem in the UK.
        
       | mfer wrote:
       | I've spent a fair amount of time talking with nurses about the
       | problems. I'm related to a bunch of people who are nurses across
       | disciplines (ER, ICU, med/surg, etc). It's been enlightening
       | hearing them talk about the problems...
       | 
       | 1. Many new nurses make the same or more and long time nurses.
       | It's frustrating when the nurse in charge with the most
       | experience is making less than new nurses. Some hospitals are
       | even trying to stop nurses from talking about pay.
       | 
       | 2. Patients in COVID have become downright mean. Add this to the
       | problems nurses have management and doctors (who are often rude
       | and arrogant) and it's a poor culture. The quality of the
       | environment, from a mental health standpoint, is on the decline.
       | 
       | 3. IT systems that they have to use were designed by people who
       | have not talked with the workers who use them. They may have been
       | designed with laws and compliance in mind. Nurses aren't the
       | people who choose or pay for these systems. But, they use them a
       | lot (maybe the most) and it's obvious they weren't taken into
       | account when designing the UX. It's maddening for them.
       | 
       | This one is big for product designers. Often we listen to the
       | people who pay for it and miss out on the people who actually
       | have to use it.
       | 
       | 4. Nurses are the catch all for jobs. Not enough aides? Nurses do
       | the work. Food service workers don't want to take food into a
       | patients room... nurses will do it. Not only do they have higher
       | ratios of patients but they fill in the work when other areas
       | have shortages, too. So, the work per patient goes up. Pay
       | doesn't go up, though.
        
         | abeppu wrote:
         | > Many new nurses make the same or more and long time nurses.
         | 
         | Is it mainly lack of information (and exhaustion) that prevents
         | these more experienced nurses from negotiating for what they're
         | worth?
        
         | causality0 wrote:
         | _3. IT systems that they have to use were designed by people
         | who have not talked with the workers who use them._
         | 
         | You couldn't be more right about that. Last week a nurse had to
         | use a computer in my wife's hospital room to log that she'd
         | given her a painkiller. The IT staff had failed to configure
         | the hospital computers to disable windows updates or restrict
         | them to off-hours and the nurse was forced to stand there for
         | ten solid minutes while Update churned, the pc restarted, and
         | Update churned some more.
        
         | zdragnar wrote:
         | Back in the days before cell phones, my mom would wind up being
         | on call for overnight labor & delivery. The final straw
         | (certainly not the first) was that they got a call in the
         | middle of the night that a woman came in in labor, and she had
         | to drive in to work (a half hour drive). This woke up my dad,
         | who also happened to be a light sleeper and worked a day shift.
         | 
         | 20 minutes later (while my mom was well on her way into work)
         | the phone rang again- it was a false alarm, she didn't need to
         | come in anymore. Naturally, it was my (not so happy) dad who
         | answered.
         | 
         | By the time she got in, they didn't have anything for her, so
         | sent her back home.
         | 
         | At the time, there wasn't quite such a crunch in nursing, so
         | the pay part wasn't accurate yet, but everything else you
         | listed (substitute COVID for %50+ of patients) was already true
         | 30 years ago.
        
           | odysseus wrote:
           | I would think some hospitals have rooms dedicated for the on-
           | call nurse(s) to sleep in. Especially with something as
           | common and false alarm prone as overnight labor & delivery.
           | Pretty sure the midwifery I went to had this.
        
         | thepasswordis wrote:
         | >Patients in COVID have become downright mean.
         | 
         | Maybe, but nurses have also used "because covid" as an excuse
         | to engage in some pretty awful behavior. Fathers have only very
         | recently been allowed in the room during ultrasounds, for
         | instance. NICUs only recently started allowing both parents to
         | visit at the same time.
        
           | majewsky wrote:
           | Is this because of the whims of individual nurses, or because
           | of policies put forth by the hospital administration?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | tristor wrote:
         | > This one is big for product designers.
         | 
         | You're right that there are definitely opportunities for
         | improvement here. As a Product person that has worked in
         | EMR/Healthcare IT systems, I can tell you the biggest challenge
         | is most of the decisions are driven by legally-required
         | compliance. In many cases, you literally cannot make it better
         | because the brokenness is /by design/ to comply with the law.
         | 
         | Nearly across the board, especially in the US, our legal and
         | regulatory climate has not kept up with technology and often
         | actively works to the detriment of technical innovation and
         | improving our systems.
        
           | primedteam wrote:
           | HITRUST certification is the most demoralizing thing I've
           | done in my life. You need a policy, a procedure and evidence
           | of things like this:
           | 
           |  _Shared system resources (e.g., registers, main memory,
           | secondary storage) are released back to the system, protected
           | from disclosure to other systems /applications/users, and
           | users cannot intentionally or unintentionally access
           | information remnants._
        
             | bawolff wrote:
             | I mean, if it was really a very high security system,
             | ensuring that confidential info in memory cannot be written
             | unencrypted to a swap file, does seem like a reasonable
             | requirement.
        
             | seanp2k2 wrote:
             | Yep, try doing that in an electron context and you quickly
             | learn why a lot of this software still runs on mainframes
             | with UX from the 80s, hard T1 lines (if they're lucky
             | enough to be off ISDNs), faxing things all around since
             | that's considered "secure", etc etc. A lot of startups
             | can't touch this stuff due to regulatory hurdles. When the
             | first step is "go change the law", it's a non-starter.
        
             | tristor wrote:
             | I understand exactly what you mean, but having done HITRUST
             | CSF certification for a system, I will say that it is not
             | as bad as some others, because at least HITRUST is /very/
             | clear in its requirements, so there's not as much vagaries
             | and back and forth with auditors after the fact, or rushed
             | changes. It's truly a nightmare to meet, but once done you
             | can be assured you will pass the audit fairly.
        
           | artful-hacker wrote:
           | I'm in this business too, and it's not just the direct
           | features supporting the law, its the law driving out time and
           | talent trying to make things better. We don't have time to
           | improve systems because we are all too concerned with meeting
           | the latest regulatory pipe dream of interoperable systems.
           | 
           | Systems that nobody has ever asked us to use. Entire APIs
           | with full access to key data, that nobody uses.
        
             | tristor wrote:
             | Yes, this is probably the bigger impact, to be honest.
             | Teams have limited resources and more and more of it is
             | cannibalized by regulatory compliance work.
        
               | giantg2 wrote:
               | We've created so much regulation that no one person can
               | know it all - not the legislators, not the
               | agents/bureaucrats, not the judges, and certainly not the
               | workers or patients who would be most affected by them.
        
           | jimmydddd wrote:
           | Steve jobs mentioned this as a reason he never wanted to do
           | enterprise sales. The user and the purchaser are two
           | different people.
        
             | m463 wrote:
             | I wonder how this is handled inside apple? Are apple
             | internal tools good or terrible?
        
           | JaimeThompson wrote:
           | Doctors and hospitals control some of the more powerful
           | lobbying groups in the United States making it a bit strange
           | they haven't worked on those issues.
        
             | namelessoracle wrote:
             | "Doctors and hospitals" are not nurses and do not seem
             | themselves as akin to nurses.
             | 
             | It's like asking why most software devs don't go to bat for
             | technical support people.
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | > Doctors and hospitals control some of the more powerful
             | lobbying groups in the United States making it a bit
             | strange they haven't worked on those issues.
             | 
             | Doctors and hospitals are not necessarily aligned groups
             | (either with each other or with nurses) on the issues, and
             | private insurers, state governments (as market participants
             | themselves, via operating public insurers such as Medicaid
             | agencies), and other players are also very powerful
             | lobbies.
        
             | asdff wrote:
             | It seems the byzantine regulatory compliance software lobby
             | is even more powerful then
        
             | lazide wrote:
             | Why when they get paid/further protected by it?
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | There is a reason why these things are like this. Someone
           | with influence is making money hand over fist with the
           | current state of affairs, so it says. Regulation are always
           | penned by those in industry they are set to regulate with
           | government connections. Politicians don't do anything unless
           | there is a push for it by lobbyists or donors because that's
           | where the incentives are.
        
             | tristor wrote:
             | For healthcare the regulations mostly entrench the big
             | players in insurance. It's regulatory capture 101.
        
               | asdff wrote:
               | And what sucks about this entire situation is even if you
               | today fixed healthcare, because you havent fixed
               | regulatory capture it will end up screwed up in some
               | other direction as soon as the grifters finish planning
               | out their graft and ringing personal phone numbers in
               | washington DC and state capitols. Fixing regulatory
               | capture is therefore required to solve the big problems
               | we have, like climate change, housing, and healthcare,
               | otherwise no fix will ever be long term and meaningful.
               | The incentive structures with regulatory capture favor
               | personal profit over public good every time.
        
         | Terry_Roll wrote:
         | >3. IT systems that they have to use were designed by people
         | who have not talked with the workers who use them. They may
         | have been designed with laws and compliance in mind. Nurses
         | aren't the people who choose or pay for these systems. But,
         | they use them a lot (maybe the most) and it's obvious they
         | weren't taken into account when designing the UX. It's
         | maddening for them.
         | 
         | >This one is big for product designers. Often we listen to the
         | people who pay for it and miss out on the people who actually
         | have to use it.
         | 
         | Thats an interesting comment because I know the main developer
         | for one of the most popular hospital systems used throughout
         | Europe and its popular because its good.
         | 
         | Saying that, I also know there are medical consultants at a
         | world famous hospital who dont really know how to program but
         | because of their position have got their software in use when
         | it perhaps shouldnt be.
         | 
         | I know alot of US programmers doing various medical systems for
         | local hospitals and health care regions with various standards
         | of programming skills.
         | 
         | Like you I also know of people in various roles, from world
         | famous multi millionaire consultants to nurses on the front
         | line. Every team & dept is different. Sometimes its a
         | managerial problem at the top of the health trust, other times
         | its just the team and low level management.
         | 
         | Saying that there is a culture of taking a sicky probably
         | because they see consultants putting private work before NHS
         | work and they see the wages some of these consultants get paid
         | and Google Scholar, PubMed, DrugBank etc keeps highlighting the
         | inadequacies of the teaching, ie they dont keep up to date,
         | some areas appear to be decades behind the science other areas
         | are within a few years of the latest research.
         | 
         | Too much reliance on drug companies when superior non
         | patentable solutions already exist.
        
         | meatsauce wrote:
         | How, in your opinion, did the Affordable Care Act affect
         | nursing? Were you in a position to observe then?
        
         | peoplefromibiza wrote:
         | preface: my parents are retired nurses and a big chunk of my
         | family works in healthcare.
         | 
         | It sounds like the issues nurses face are global and do not
         | significantly change across different systems (the system in my
         | country is completely different from USA)
         | 
         | It probably comes down to the fact that this is a human problem
         | and to solve it we must radically change the expectations
         | around care and primarily being taken care of.
         | 
         | There's no technological deus ex machina or amount of training
         | that can change the situation without shifting the POV.
         | 
         | IMO people working in HC are subject to a lot of stress and
         | must be protected at the cost of making it a bit unpleasant for
         | the patients to be cured.
         | 
         | It's such a fundamental foundation of our lives that the system
         | should be calibrated to create the best possible working
         | environment for those who are working instead of moving it
         | toward a customer reviewd activity that focuses on their
         | satisfaction.
         | 
         | I know it can sound unpopular, but receiving the best medical
         | care possible is not a right, it's a goal that more often than
         | not it's almost impossible to achieve, so let's improve the
         | working conditions so that the workers can give their best
         | without questioning too much all the sacrifices that the job
         | requires.
        
           | lazide wrote:
           | Well, first you'd need to get over the idea it's oriented
           | around customer satisfaction or outcomes, which it doesn't
           | seem to be here in the US.
        
             | peoplefromibiza wrote:
             | I don't know the US system so well to argue, I can only
             | expand on what I meant: the job of healthcare is not to
             | make people comfortable or make their wishes come true, HC,
             | unfortunately, it's not a democracy.
             | 
             | What I've seen in the past 30 years is a gradual shift
             | towards becoming some sort of wellness centers for disease:
             | patients that complain about other patients, patients that
             | complain about their accomodations, patients that complain
             | about therapies, most of all patients relatives that want
             | to have a say on everything that's going on up to the point
             | that doctors simply do what asked to not waste too much
             | time with them.
             | 
             | And to add insult to injury, all the legalities that made
             | taking a decision virtually impossible without risking too
             | much.
             | 
             | Of course there are situations were malpractice causes more
             | damages than the illness itself and those must be
             | reprimanded, we can't afford to disrupt trust in medicine
             | in any way, but the results should be taken into higher
             | consideration than the opinions.
             | 
             | ER, intensive care and other kinds of "hardcore" department
             | should also be judged differently, just like it happens to
             | military personnel who are not subject to regular justice
             | while on duty.
        
         | safdahfslh23s wrote:
         | My partner is a physician in an ICU and a lot of her colleagues
         | have talked about leaving the field as well. Their complaints
         | are #2 & #3 along with:
         | 
         | 5. Pay cuts - Most of the critical doctor specialties (ER, ICU,
         | primary) that were the backbone of the pandemic got "raises"
         | that were less than inflation (hers was 1.5%) while profitable
         | elective specialties got big raises. The root cause is the
         | billing system where elective surgeries bill pay out more than
         | critical roles. Still, it's extremely demoralizing to be called
         | a "pandemic hero" and have your pay get cut.
         | 
         | 6. Criminal and Financial Liablity - Healthcare is delivered by
         | a team yet the financial and criminal penalties for mistakes
         | are assessed at the individual level. Recently a nurse was
         | given a criminal sentence for a drug mistake which many believe
         | was systematic failure (bad UI / IT systems, bad hospital
         | practices, AND negligence on the nurse). Imagine getting sued
         | or jail time as an engineer for dropping a production database.
         | The few malpractice cases my partner has been involved in, it
         | was very clear that the issues were systematic and perpetuated
         | by hospital practices. However, if they had gone to trial, an
         | arbitrary worked would d have been sued and the hospital
         | wouldn't change its crappy practices. Institutions have
         | effectively dodged liability in many cases.
         | 
         | 7. Chronic understaffing and burnout - most ICUs have been
         | understaffed throughout the pandemic. From an economics POV it
         | seems crazy that their is a labor shortage but salaries are
         | effectively dropping.
        
         | vonnik wrote:
         | I work at a startup* trying to tackle nurse burnout, and two of
         | my family members are nurses. Here are a few things I've
         | learned: - Nurses were getting burned out before the pandemic,
         | and the US has a nursing shortage that's been going on for
         | about 90 years (it started with an infrastructure buildout in
         | the 1930s).* So it's a secular problem, with chronic as well as
         | acute causal factors.
         | 
         | - There is a ladder of nursing credentials, and the shortage
         | effects them differently. Hiring for roles like CNA and LPN/LVN
         | has exploded because of the shortage of RNs and above. CNAs get
         | trained in 4-12 weeks to do the heavy lifting of care; RNs get
         | ~3 year degrees to perform much more complicated tasks.
         | 
         | - Burnout, and the nursing shortage, are in a positive feedback
         | loop/downward spiral. That is, the more nurses burn out, the
         | more they cause other nurses to burn out. Short-staffed
         | facilities have a very hard time pulling back to normal
         | staffing, because nobody wants to join a skeleton crew. (I know
         | of long-term care facilities where the scheduling nurses (the
         | bosses) are working the graveyard shift because they can't fill
         | it.)
         | 
         | - Many nurses work rigid schedules on 12-14 shifts, and a lot
         | of medical errors happen at the end of those shifts. *
         | 
         | - The hot US job market (Great resignation, great reshuffle) is
         | hitting nursing especially hard; it is very sensitive to
         | external shocks. There are paths to easier work and higher pay.
         | 
         | - Many healthcare facilities and systems don't give nurses
         | flexibility or the possibility of advancement. (One family
         | member will need to quit her current job and come back in a
         | year or two to her current employer if she wants to move up a
         | pay grade -- which is like some tech companies -- but slower
         | moving and lower paying.)
         | 
         | - Many facilities are run entirely on foreign staff (the H2-B
         | visa allows that). And many nurses are imported from the
         | Philippines.
         | 
         | * https://clipboardhealth.com
         | 
         | * https://www.nursing.upenn.edu/nhhc/workforce-issues/where-
         | di...
         | 
         | *
         | https://www.nytimes.com/video/opinion/100000008158650/covid-...
         | 
         | (plug: if you're interested in this problem, we're hiring:
         | https://culture.clipboardhealth.com)
        
           | clumsysmurf wrote:
           | > Many facilities are run entirely on foreign staff (the H2-B
           | visa allows that). And many nurses are imported from the
           | Philippines.
           | 
           | I'm curious what the consequences of this are, how does this
           | impact the profession in the US?
        
         | pvarangot wrote:
         | I have training similar to a WFR that I got in Argentina. I
         | wanted to certify as an EMT in California because why not? It's
         | 160 hours of classes plus 24 hours or practical or something
         | like that for the national exam and then it's the state
         | requirements. Private training is around 2000 dollars. Ok I'm
         | cool with that.
         | 
         | There's no way to get a certification with online learning or
         | with any kind of in person time schedule compatible with my
         | job... ok... maybe I can get time off? I have to re-get all
         | sorts of immunizations I already have and re-do medical checks
         | that I already had to get for my green card, like a year ago...
         | ok... that's a lot more time off. Oh, they drug check me!
         | well... I guess even I would work on healthcare more for
         | vocational reasons I'm not doing it while I'm in California.
         | It's just too much of a hassle and with the staff shortages I
         | feel I'm just being taken advantage off.
         | 
         | In Nevada it's only take the course, pass the exam and you can
         | already go on an ambulance, so are most other states.
        
         | strangattractor wrote:
         | I always want to quit my job and I'm not a nurse. I think it is
         | a growing trend. I spend more time typing in Slack than typing
         | in code:)
        
         | ihodes wrote:
         | I think this is a great summary of some of the main challenges
         | nurses are facing.
         | 
         | I'd add to #1 that travel (temp) nurses are making 4x+ more
         | than staff nurses, I've heard as high as $13-17k per week in
         | high-demand areas. This exacerbates the problem, as staff
         | nurses hear this, and if they can, they leave. Travel nurses
         | can be great, but they won't know the facility and workflows
         | and people as well as staff nurses: staff nurses now pick up
         | more slack, all while getting paid 1/10th what their new
         | colleagues are. This is more than most doctors.
         | 
         | For #3, this problem is made worse by additional compliance
         | burden. Nurses need to document more and more, click more and
         | more, read more and more... with less and less time. And on
         | systems that are unpleasant to use. Among other issues, this
         | leads to problems like these[0], which drive more and more
         | nurses away.
         | 
         | I'm working with a badass team on solving some parts of these
         | problems, particularly relating to technology and workflows. If
         | you're interested (across basically any role, but product
         | designers, engineers, product managers are top of mind right
         | now), let me know (email in bio)!
         | 
         | [0]: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/radonda-vaught-nurse-guilty-
         | dea...
        
         | luckydata wrote:
         | about #3 that ain't a design issue, it's a policy issue. Until
         | healthcare in the US is about maximizing profit extraction by
         | every party involved things will not change.
         | 
         | For profit healthcare is an abomination and a blight on the
         | very soul of this country. If I believed in religion I would
         | say God will judge us very harshly for allowing this system to
         | stay in place for so long.
        
         | elhudy wrote:
         | Don't forget that nurses can now legally be thrown under the
         | bus with criminal charges for malpractice while hospitals walk
         | away scotch-free [1]. This is huge in the nursing community
         | right now.
         | 
         | [1]https://www.npr.org/sections/health-
         | shots/2022/03/24/1088397...
        
           | Wistar wrote:
           | And, alas, found guilty:
           | 
           | https://www.npr.org/sections/health-
           | shots/2022/03/25/1088902...
        
             | gruez wrote:
             | Discussed on HN with counter-argument:
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30778376
        
             | aiisjustanif wrote:
             | Jfc that is terrible.
        
               | rectang wrote:
               | But the electorate continues to reward "tough on crime"
               | prosecutors. Their incentives are all towards maxing out
               | the savagery towards defendants, systemic repercussions
               | be damned.
               | 
               | From the article:
               | 
               | > _Janie Harvey Garner, the founder of Show Me Your
               | Stethoscope, a nursing group on Facebook with more than
               | 600,000 members, worries the conviction will have a
               | chilling effect on nurses disclosing their own errors or
               | near errors, which could have a detrimental effect on the
               | quality of patient care._
               | 
               | > _" Health care just changed forever," she said after
               | the verdict. "You can no longer trust people to tell the
               | truth because they will be incriminating themselves."_
               | 
               | That's the exact opposite of how the NTSB operates. It
               | satisfies the infantile urge to blame and shame a
               | supposed evildoer, to the great detriment of everybody in
               | the long run.
        
               | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
               | > That's the exact opposite of how the NTSB operates.
               | 
               | Bingo! I have a friend in the UK who organizes "post-
               | mortem" (no pun intended) workshops and process training
               | for hospital staff, precisely to do the NTSB-like thing
               | after medical procedure errors occur. Rather than trying
               | to point fingers and identify scapegoats, the central
               | question is: "what went wrong here, and how do we reduce
               | the chances of that happening again?"
               | 
               | Of course, occasionally the answer might be "We hired the
               | wrong person, and we should fire them", but that seems to
               | be only _very_ rarely true.
        
               | ethbr0 wrote:
               | An an organizational ethos, it's hard to argue with a
               | default of " _We_ fail, _you_ succeed. "
               | 
               | When failures happen, it's usually the organization
               | rather than the individual that's key to changing.
        
               | evil-olive wrote:
               | this is fairly common in the medical field, the usual
               | name for it is "morbidity and mortality" [0]
               | 
               | > The objectives of a well-run M&M conference are to
               | identify adverse outcomes associated with medical error,
               | to modify behavior and judgment based on previous
               | experiences, and to prevent repetition of errors leading
               | to complications. Conferences are non-punitive and focus
               | on the goal of improved patient care.
               | 
               | 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morbidity_and_mortality_
               | confer...
        
               | dolni wrote:
               | > But the electorate continues to reward "tough on crime"
               | prosecutors.
               | 
               | Do you believe that people who vote for "tough on crime"
               | prosecutors are seeking harsh punishment of mistakes?
               | 
               | Or do they want criminals acting in malice to have the
               | book thrown at them so other people aren't needless
               | victims?
        
               | rectang wrote:
               | I don't think "tough on crime" voters strongly
               | differentiate, based on the behaviors of the prosecutors
               | themselves. The biggest resume priority seems to be
               | maintaining a ludicrously high conviction percentage,
               | which is awful for different reasons (innocent defendants
               | forced into plea bargains).
               | 
               | Only a small subset of prosecutors elected in the most
               | liberal districts are rewarded by their constituencies
               | for exercising prosecutorial discretion. I say that
               | without making any judgment as to whether they're using
               | that discretion well -- I'm just observing that very few
               | prosecutors work that way.
        
               | dolni wrote:
               | > I don't think "tough on crime" voters strongly
               | differentiate, based on the behaviors of the prosecutors
               | themselves. The biggest resume priority seems to be
               | maintaining a ludicrously high conviction percentage,
               | which is awful for different reasons (innocent defendants
               | forced into plea bargains).
               | 
               | Well, I think your position is probably one of ignorance.
               | Plenty of people I talk to are for tough prosecution on
               | things like violent crime and against tough prosecution
               | for simple drug possession.
               | 
               | > Only a small subset of prosecutors elected in the most
               | liberal districts are rewarded by their constituencies
               | for exercising prosecutorial discretion. I say that
               | without making any judgment as to whether they're using
               | that discretion well -- I'm just observing that very few
               | prosecutors work that way.
               | 
               | Yes, that does seem to be a trend. Prosecutorial
               | discretion is actually important, but it doesn't mean you
               | let crime run rampant, either.
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | > The biggest resume priority seems to be maintaining a
               | ludicrously high conviction percentage, which is awful
               | for different reasons (innocent defendants forced into
               | plea bargains).
               | 
               | I don't live in a jurisdiction that elect prosecutors,
               | but is this actually a thing? Do candidates/incumbents
               | run campaign ads on their conviction rate? Are voters
               | researching/talking about the conviction rate of the
               | candidates like it's a pissing contest?
        
               | rectang wrote:
               | Yes. It was true for our current US Vice President,
               | Kamala Harris for example -- but she's not an outlier,
               | this happens all the time.
               | 
               | https://theintercept.com/2019/02/07/kamala-harris-san-
               | franci...
               | 
               | > _If the conviction rate had been measured by actual
               | cases pursued, rather than all cases referred by police,
               | Hallinan said, his office would have had a conviction
               | rate that was relatively similar to Los Angeles and other
               | major cities._
               | 
               | > _And Hallinan was getting results. Overall, crime rates
               | were plummeting. Violent crime had gone down close to 60
               | percent in San Francisco since Hallinan took office._
               | 
               | > _Still, the low conviction rate resulted in headline
               | after headline about San Francisco's permissive attitude
               | toward crime, a media environment harnessed by the Harris
               | campaign._
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | anonporridge wrote:
               | Worse, the family of the victim had apparently forgiven
               | the nurse for her mistake and didn't want criminal
               | prosecution.
               | 
               | This was driven purely by the state prosecutor.
        
               | HarryHirsch wrote:
               | Consider this: someone drives without paying proper
               | attention and kills someone. It's time for victim impact
               | statements, and relative after relative asks the court
               | for lenience on the driver because the victim was a drunk
               | and a wifebeater, the world is better off without him.
               | 
               | Not sure that that is a good idea, justice is about more
               | than just those immediately affected by a crime
        
               | wonderwonder wrote:
               | Do we really want to live in a society where people are
               | not prosecuted because the family of the victim forgave
               | them? So if two people commit the same offence, Person A
               | is not prosecuted because the victim's family forgave him
               | but Person B is because the victims family did not? Was
               | offender B just unlucky on victim selection? The rule and
               | application of law should not be based on the feelings of
               | the victims family. Did the dead person forgive them?
        
               | ethbr0 wrote:
               | We certainly don't want to ignore them, given they have
               | the most immediate understanding of the situation and
               | entitlement to guilt.
               | 
               | We don't allow plaintiffs to sue without standing. Why do
               | we allow DAs to prosecute without a victim?
               | 
               | The state has a justification to pursue crime, but it
               | seems like that should be limited when there's (no
               | victim) or (victim who disagrees with prosecution).
        
               | wonderwonder wrote:
               | Is the dead person not a victim? If someone is murdered
               | and their family is like good I hated them anyway does
               | that nullify the existence of a crime? Are we basing
               | prosecution now on the character of the victim? That's a
               | pretty quick path to deciding that certain victims have
               | no value in society.
        
               | graywh wrote:
               | it was the county DA and he's up for reelection this year
        
               | wonderwonder wrote:
               | Is it though? Should a cop be prosecuted for accidentally
               | killing an innocent civilian in the course of duty during
               | a non violent traffic stop? I would argue that they
               | should be. How many chances should a nurse get to
               | accidentally kill someone? Do they only get prosecuted
               | the second time? Third?
               | 
               | If you are responsible for the death of another person
               | due to your own negligence then you should be prosecuted
               | for a crime and be removed from any scenario where you
               | are able to repeat that mistake.
        
               | Jiro wrote:
               | A cop killing an innocent civilian at a nonviolent
               | traffic stop can pretty much happen only because of
               | malice or negligence. We use the word "accident", but
               | it's never really an accident. If a nurse accidentally
               | kills someone, it may really be an accident.
               | 
               | Furthermore, the nurse is in a profession where people
               | die all the time due to reasons beyond the nurse's
               | control, and surviving relatives are not always rational
               | in who they blame. So nurses will be falsely accused much
               | more often than police.
        
               | ethbr0 wrote:
               | > _A cop killing an innocent civilian at a nonviolent
               | traffic stop can pretty much happen only because of
               | malice or negligence._
               | 
               | I'm not sure this is true, specifically because the
               | difference between a nonviolent traffic stop and a lethal
               | (to the officer) traffic stop can be a split second.
               | 
               | If my keyboard had a 0.01% chance of lethally shocking
               | me... I'm pretty sure that would alter my typing
               | behavior.
        
               | wonderwonder wrote:
               | "can pretty much happen only because of malice or
               | negligence"
               | 
               | Negligence means "failure to take proper care in doing
               | something", which is often just called an accident.
               | 
               | That is exactly what the nurse did, she failed to take
               | proper care and someone died. The nice thing about the
               | law is that what the relatives feel should not matter at
               | all, that's why we are supposed to have impartial
               | prosecutors that review the facts and determine if
               | charges are warranted.
               | 
               | Bottom line, no matter the profession if you fail to take
               | proper care and someone dies as a result, you should be
               | prosecuted and prevented from getting the opportunity to
               | do it again.
        
               | Jiro wrote:
               | >Negligence means "failure to take proper care in doing
               | something", which is often just called an accident.
               | 
               | This is not true, because you're equivocating on the word
               | "proper". An accident is failure to take proper care,
               | where proper care means "care that follows the rules".
               | Negligence is failure to take proper care, where "proper"
               | means "can reasonably be expected". They are not the same
               | thing.
        
               | wonderwonder wrote:
               | Not really sure where you are getting those definitions
               | from. Proper means proper. The nurse did not follow the
               | rules. The nurse did not provide any of the care that
               | could have been reasonably expected. Fail to see a
               | difference, she failed both of your definitions.
        
               | Jiro wrote:
               | It is possible for there to be rules that someone cannot
               | be reasonably expected to follow.
        
             | HarryHirsch wrote:
             | The solution isn't that Radonda Vought, who killed a
             | patient through a string of crassly negligent actions
             | should walk free - one would like to see the whole chain of
             | command be given serious prison time. It's clear that
             | patient safety at Vanderbilt isn't a priority - training
             | and safety culture reflects that.
             | 
             | Strange to see that HN, which is generally suspicious of
             | copaganda, falls for very transparent nursepaganda.
        
               | Sakos wrote:
               | Imagine if aviation functioned like health care in the
               | US. We'd have a magnitude more crashes and deaths.
        
               | hawaiianbrah wrote:
               | Just one magnitude... ?
        
               | ethbr0 wrote:
               | > _one would like to see the whole chain of command be
               | given serious prison time_
               | 
               | Absolutely. To each according to their authority.
               | 
               | RaDonda Vaught made a mistake, and admitted it,
               | repeatedly, in multiple interviews.
               | 
               | But that mistake was only partly because of her free
               | will. Vanderbilt University Medical Center incentivized
               | her to make that choice, for their own profit, and with
               | control over her employment.
               | 
               | RaDonda Vaught goes to prison.
               | 
               | VUMC pays a fine and nobody goes to prison.
               | 
               | I think HN takes a dim view of a company holding
               | someone's contract in their hands, saying "Do something
               | illegal or I tear this up," and then blaming the employee
               | when everything explodes.
               | 
               | They're playing chicken with patients' lives, and passing
               | off the charges to their employees when they lose.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | Its the strong libertarian vibe. They think consequences
               | shouldn't exist, and the dead guy can take his money
               | elsewhere.
        
               | LanceH wrote:
               | The strong libertarian vibe of npr saying she's being
               | scapegoated?
               | 
               | When you have millions of drugs being issued, there will
               | be some legitimate mistakes happening -- some will even
               | cause death. If you want people to actual work in
               | healthcare, they shouldn't be fearing for their lives for
               | being less than perfect.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | please cite where an npr report gives the impression
               | she's been scapegoated in such a way that she doesn't
               | deserve the consequences she's been given. I'd love to
               | read it honestly.
               | 
               | From what I've seen there's been a lot of reporting on
               | her case, and how Vandy rightfully deserves a lot of
               | pain, and a lot on how a subset of nurses feel she's been
               | railroaded, but I've not seen what you claim and would
               | like to know where I missed it.
               | 
               | I'll also re note that pharmacists have carried this
               | burden for over a hundred years, and their removal from
               | the process is part of how this chain of mistakes
               | happened to begin with.
        
           | dragonwriter wrote:
           | > Don't forget that nurses can now legally be thrown under
           | the bus with criminal charges for malpractice while hospitals
           | walk away scotch-free
           | 
           | The nurse in that case was prosecuted for criminal reckless
           | homicide (not malpractice, which is civil negligence.) The
           | characterization of the hospitals direct responsibility is
           | negligence not arising to criminal (gross) negligence (as the
           | principal of _respondeat superior_ doesn 't apply in criminal
           | law, the employees recklessness would not be imputed to the
           | employer the way it would in a civil case.)
           | 
           | As for civil liability if the hospital, that was settled out
           | of court with the victims family, the hospital did not get
           | off scot free.
           | 
           | This... isn't a new thing that deserves the "now" label like
           | it is a change. Criminal wrongdoing by employees (including
           | in healthcare) very often does not rise to a level of
           | criminality for the employer, and that's been true for a long
           | time.
        
           | anonporridge wrote:
           | This kind of thing is going to further disassociate nurses
           | from interacting like a human with their patients. If you
           | risk criminal prosecution and prison time from making a
           | mistake, everyone starts walking on eggshells and become
           | afraid of doing anything beyond box ticking. They'll start
           | turning a blind eye to things they know are wrong, because
           | the system doesn't see them. All work will align towards pure
           | compliance with the law and the hospital system at the
           | expense of intimate connection with patients.
           | 
           | And of course, a lot of nurses are in the job for the human
           | connection, and will consequently be burned out at an
           | increasing rate.
           | 
           | To some degree this might actually be good long term, because
           | it will be that much harder for hospitals to manipulate
           | nurses into working around the limitations of the system to
           | provide real care, which allows the administration to turn a
           | blind eye to their own flaws. There's going to be a surge of
           | malicious compliance that ends up shining a bright spotlight
           | on just how abusive and dysfunctional hospital systems really
           | are.
           | 
           | And patients will ultimately be the ones who suffer.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Soulsbane wrote:
         | Food service workers don't want to take food into a patients
         | room?
         | 
         | My mom worked in food service for several years at a hospital
         | and took the food into the rooms. Is this not the norm?
        
         | mikewarot wrote:
         | >3. IT systems that they have to use were designed by people
         | who have not talked with the workers who use them.
         | 
         | Every time the computers went down at a friends ER, the waiting
         | room emptied out as the staff were able to use paper forms and
         | just get their jobs done, instead of being forced through
         | thousands of menu clicks and choices that made no sense.
         | 
         | EVERY SINGLE TIME -- Epic or as I call it... the Epic Failure.
         | I always give my condolences to staff forced to use it.
        
         | sli wrote:
         | > IT systems that they have to use were designed by people who
         | have not talked with the workers who use them.
         | 
         | This was exactly my experience when I worked for a medical
         | software startup. Our (very unfinished) software got deployed
         | in a hospital with no training, no orientation, no nothing, and
         | it was such a disaster that it was a patient safety issue. Mind
         | you, the engineering team had no say in any of this, not that
         | we were even given the chance, and we weren't even aware that
         | the deployment was for real. We were under the impression that
         | the deployment was for testing purposes, because we were aware
         | that the software was unfinished.
         | 
         | It was a breathtakingly poor decision purely on the part of
         | managers (and, frankly, sales) on both sides of that deal and
         | it was doctors and patients who suffered because of it. An
         | absolute nightmare all around and I'm glad to no longer be
         | there.
        
         | mikemac wrote:
         | Agree with all of this, and just to add one thing: liability.
         | 
         | Look at the RaDonda Vaught case or the Michelle Heughins case;
         | terrifying to be looking at jail time for a med error.
         | 
         | Many nurses are watching these cases more closely and deciding
         | that since staffing isn't getting any better and they won't be
         | protected, it's not worth the risk.
        
           | sfteus wrote:
           | Married to an RN and absolutely sympathetic to the
           | staffing/pay plight they're currently facing. I'm
           | unfortunately not very familiar with the case of Michelle
           | Heughins, but I've heard a lot of the RaDonda Vaught case.
           | The high points of the case as I understand them:
           | 
           | * Vaught stated her department was not understaffed, nor was
           | she tired. The incident also occurred in 2017, so pre-
           | pandemic
           | 
           | * Vaught went to dispense Versed (generic name midazolam) by
           | the brand name, instead of the generic name as they're
           | trained to do. This led to her selecting vercuronium bromide
           | instead
           | 
           | * Vaught stated she had dispensed midazolam several times
           | before, which would have had to have been by the generic name
           | 
           | * Vaught ignored several warnings from the dispensing machine
           | stating the patient was not prescribed vercuronium bromide
           | 
           | * Vaught ignored the red cap on the vial dispensed that
           | stated it was a paralytic agent
           | 
           | * Vaught ignored that vercuronium bromide needed to be
           | reconstituted with sterile water (unlike midazolam, which
           | comes as a liquid). She stated she thought it was odd that
           | she didn't have to reconstitute it before when dispensing the
           | correct medicine
           | 
           | * Vaught did not scan in the medication before or after
           | giving it to the patient, which would have likely prompted
           | another warning about it not being prescribed
           | 
           | * Vaught could not recall exactly how much she gave to the
           | patient
           | 
           | * Vaught immediately left the room after injection, and did
           | not wait to observe the patient for any side-effects
           | 
           | All of this information is available in the DA discovery
           | documents
           | (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6785652-RaDonda-
           | Vaug...) and the CMS report
           | (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5346023-CMS-
           | Report.h...).
           | 
           | The opinions on the case I've observed have been nurses who
           | aren't aware of this and saying she should not have been
           | convicted, and the nurses who are aware who think the
           | conviction is fair ...ish. The latter is at least unanimous
           | she should have her license revoked.
           | 
           | Most agree that Vanderbilt should be held responsible for
           | negligence as well. My wife's hospital for instance does not
           | stock _any_ paralytics within machines, to prevent it being
           | accidentally dispensed without involving the pharmacy.
           | There's also evidence that Vanderbilt tried to cover the
           | incident up.
           | 
           | I've made a point of stressing to any RN I've talked about it
           | with the importance of having a lawyer with you when talking
           | with investigators. Vaught straight up incriminated herself
           | multiple times during her initial interview.
        
             | hermitdev wrote:
             | I'm not familiar with the case, but assuming what you've
             | outlined above is accurate, I have no doubt a jury would
             | convict. Negligence actually sounds like too nice of a word
             | for that train wreck of events.
        
             | michael1999 wrote:
             | There's a big difference from revoking her license, and
             | locking her in a cage for 3 years.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | Yeah usually that difference is causing someone to die by
               | being criminally negligent. Which she was.
        
           | giantg2 wrote:
           | I believe you can even be personally liable for HIPPA
           | security violations as a user or dev of a healthcare system.
           | That seems a bit scary. I agree that regulation persuades
           | people not to do things out of fear of breaking the law. We
           | see this in it's intentional form with regulation of other
           | things such as abortion, guns, etc. Put so many laws in place
           | that risk of accidentally breaking one and receiving an
           | extensive punishment isn't worth it.
        
             | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
             | > HIPPA
             | 
             | *HIPAA
        
             | throwawayboise wrote:
             | > I believe you can even be personally liable for HIPPA
             | security violations as a user or dev of a healthcare
             | system.
             | 
             | Welcome to being an engineer, if that's what you want to
             | call yourself. The engineer who approves a bridge design
             | can be held liable if it collapses due to a design fault.
        
               | labcomputer wrote:
               | One difference is that HIPAA has a bunch of statutory
               | penalties for "technical violations" that might or might
               | not harm anyone. For example, if a call center staff
               | discloses patient information to, say, the child or
               | parent of a patient, that comes with an automatic fine
               | and (potentially) jail time.
               | 
               | Another aspect is that certain HIPAA allowances for data
               | usage require a lawyer's expertise, not an engineer's.
               | For example, can a health insurer use patient data to
               | train a model w/o first obtaining patient consent? If the
               | model will be used for "healthcare operations" (i.e.,
               | adjudicating claims), you might argue that the answer is
               | yes. If the same model will be used for suggesting
               | treatment options to doctors, you might argue that the
               | answer is no. If you answer wrongly, you are hit with a
               | statutory fine.
               | 
               | It's like having a fine for painting the bridge the wrong
               | color because there is a law that bridges must be green,
               | but you used lime. Not because you're worried about the
               | bridge collapsing, but because the law says so.
               | 
               | Generally, civil engineers don't need to worry about
               | fines or jail as long as things stay up.
        
               | initplus wrote:
               | Lot's of better paid gigs with better working conditions
               | where you aren't personally legally liable if you write a
               | bug. I don't especially care about what job title some
               | board thinks I'm allowed to use.
        
               | giantg2 wrote:
               | Generally the firm's insurance will cover an engineer
               | since they are a "professional". Software "engineers"
               | generally have not been individually liable for bugs.
               | Usually the software user agreements don't allow for this
               | sort of thing.
               | 
               | Basically, contracts can control the liability in most
               | cases, but HIPPA prevents that by explicitly defining
               | liability under the statute.
               | 
               | Here's some info on the engineer portion.
               | 
               | https://www.nspe.org/resources/professional-
               | liability/liabil...
        
           | Shuang1 wrote:
           | That case goes far beyond med error and I don't understand
           | why people keep bringing it up as an example.
           | 
           | She pulled the wrong med, and then injected it and walked out
           | of the room rather than observing for effects. Also the med
           | she pulled had warnings on all sides of the bottle and on the
           | top saying very clearly that it's fatal to administer without
           | ventilation. This went beyond a mistake to negligence.
        
             | rvba wrote:
             | > She pulled the wrong med, and then injected it and walked
             | out of the room rather than observing for effects
             | 
             | With staff shortages nurses dont have the time for that.
             | 
             | Hire 2x more nurses - so there is 2x more time for each
             | patient.
        
             | cyberlurker wrote:
             | Right, when I first read the summary it didn't adequately
             | cover how careless the nurse was. It wasn't just a small
             | mistake.
             | 
             | Edit: I should say that doesn't mean I think it makes any
             | sense the hospital isn't liable and jail time for the nurse
             | seems odd
        
             | sithlord wrote:
             | Literally every medication has warnings slapped all over
             | it. My partner worked at Vanderbilt (on a different floor)
             | around this time, and one constant complaint I heard (prior
             | to the incident) was how there was hardly any controls
             | around anything there.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | Yeah, there's no doubt that this is a shitshow from how
               | Vandy is described (and nursing in general especially
               | with these automated pharm boxes), but that should be
               | additional consequences, not this nurse avoiding hers.
        
             | js2 wrote:
             | Janie Harvey Garner, a St. Louis registered nurse:
             | 
             | "In response to a story like this one, there are two kinds
             | of nurses," Garner said. "You have the nurses who assume
             | they would never make a mistake like that, and usually it's
             | because they don't realize they could. And the second kind
             | are the ones who know this could happen, any day, no matter
             | how careful they are. This could be me. I could be
             | RaDonda."
             | 
             | https://khn.org/news/article/radonda-vaught-nurse-error-
             | medi...
             | 
             | HN readers can look at this case filing:
             | 
             | https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6785652-RaDonda-
             | Vaug...
             | 
             | > Also the med she pulled had warnings on all sides of the
             | bottle and on the top saying very clearly that it's fatal
             | to administer without ventilation.
             | 
             | The linked PDF includes images of medicine in question.
             | There's a single warning on top that reads "WARNING:
             | PARALYZING AGENT" and a red cap. I don't see any warnings
             | on the side. The vial appears to be tiny, smaller than my
             | thumb.
             | 
             | But yes, she made a series of mistakes, listed on the last
             | two pages of the PDF.
             | 
             | I am not a nurse, but I can easily imagine how someone
             | could make the errors she did in an overworked and high-
             | stress environment. It's a cascading series of errors that
             | starts with overriding the medicine cabinet when she can't
             | find the medicine she's looking for. But according to her
             | defense, overriding the cabinet had become almost standard
             | operating procedure at Vanderbilt at that timeframe. Once
             | she starts down this path, she's operating on automatic and
             | almost blind to what she's doing.
             | 
             | I agree she was negligent. I don't think she should go to
             | prison for it. In the bigger picture, this is causing more
             | nurses to quit, likely leading to more medical errors and
             | deaths, not fewer.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | If nurses quit over criminal liability for killing
               | someone by being that careless, everyone is better off by
               | them not being in the field. Pharmacy has had the same
               | rules for over a hundred years. A great example is even
               | in the movie a wonderful life.
               | 
               | edit: minor grammar fix
        
               | kenjackson wrote:
               | If you don't go to jail for this, do you do so for any
               | sort of negligence? What about an Uber driver that runs a
               | red light and kills a pedistrian walking? Or is drunk and
               | kills someone? That worries me a lot more than this
               | story.
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | >I agree she was negligent. I don't think she should go
               | to prison for it.
               | 
               | but we literally have a law for "negligent homicide"?
        
               | js2 wrote:
               | Yes we do, but we also give DAs discretion over when to
               | enforce it. Given the extenuating circumstances, I don't
               | think it should have been enforced here.
               | 
               | Her employer, by not creating a culture of safety, set
               | her up for failure.
               | 
               | I just don't see how in the long term this prosecution
               | reduces medical errors and generally disagree with
               | criminalizing mistakes; even ones such as this.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | Enforcing criminal liability for homicidal negligence is
               | how you force respect of even basic safety requirements
               | that already existed.
               | 
               | I'm not arguing that hospitals aren't currently a
               | shitshow, I'm aware I've worked in them. That doesn't
               | excuse this nurse's complete lack of respect for the
               | risks she took.
        
               | Sakos wrote:
               | As I've said before, if aviation insisted on criminal
               | punishment for pilots, we'd be _far_ worse off. Many
               | accidents are caused by fear of punishment. Culture of
               | safety can only be implemented and enforced top-down. Why
               | punish the nurses when they 're not the ones responsible
               | for what kind of culture exists at their institution?
        
               | js2 wrote:
               | "The beatings will continue until moral improves."
               | 
               | We cannot prosecute our way out of medical errors, and
               | what you claim is at odds with the opinions of medical
               | professionals.
               | 
               | https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/15/opinion/radonda-
               | vaught-me...
               | 
               | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25077248/
        
               | chrischen wrote:
               | That enforcement causes nurses to not want to work, as
               | the nurses aren't the decision makers in making a culture
               | of safety. The administrators bear that responsibility so
               | maybe we should enforce it on them.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | This nurse was the decision maker in whether she bothered
               | to check the label on the vial for what she was injecting
               | to the patient, and / or bothering to scan it _as
               | required_ before leaving them to die in terror.
               | 
               | I'm not sure what world you live in, but I'd like to live
               | in the one where criminal negligence resulting in
               | avoidable death is prosecuted.
        
         | xyzzyz wrote:
         | > 2. Patients in COVID have become downright mean. Add this to
         | the problems nurses have management and doctors (who are often
         | rude and arrogant) and it's a poor culture. The quality of the
         | environment, from a mental health standpoint, is on the
         | decline.
         | 
         | Mean customers, and rude coworkers? I sympathize, but this is a
         | reality in a lot of industries. I have no reason to believe
         | that healthcare here is worse than average.
        
           | woodruffw wrote:
           | Most industries are neither tasked with restoring health nor
           | with being the bearer of hard truths about a person's health.
           | I think it stands to reason that healthcare can be a
           | particularly toxic environment for those reasons.
        
             | mfer wrote:
             | Half of the toxic problem is from the people being treated.
             | The other half (and sometimes more than half) is from
             | management and co-workers (i.e. doctors). Not all doctors
             | are bad but enough of them are to make an impact.
             | 
             | There's a culture problem there.
        
               | woodruffw wrote:
               | Absolutely. In case it wasn't clear: I was saying that
               | just _dealing_ with peoples ' health makes for a
               | fundamentally stressful and potentially toxic
               | environment, even if each individual in question is
               | perfectly kind and reasonable.
               | 
               | Mistreatment by doctors and management isn't excused by
               | that, but I think it can be seen (partially) through that
               | lens.
        
           | titzer wrote:
        
             | fundad wrote:
             | Health care seems to be part of the institutions that are
             | of no use to certain cults. It's part of the effort to
             | dismantle the administrative state and reserve health care
             | for the 1%.
        
           | LordDragonfang wrote:
           | All customer-facing positions have to deal with rude
           | customers. Very few of those positions specifically _select
           | for_ customers with a high correlation to selfish and /or
           | antisocial conspiratorial behavior. Almost all COVID
           | hospitalizations are unvaccinated, and there's a very large
           | (if not majority) portion among that population that chose
           | not to vaccinate for entirely selfish reasons, and another
           | large portion who have been actively consuming media telling
           | them the members of the medical profession are the enemy.
           | You'd be hard pressed to select for a more adversarial
           | customer base.
        
             | nostrebored wrote:
             | This isn't particularly reasonable analysis. A large chunk
             | of the unvaccinated population is elderly and
             | contraindicated for vaccination or in hospice care. From
             | talking with nurses, the elderly population has its own set
             | of problems and frustrations. Imagine trying to administer
             | care to someone who has no idea why they're in a hospital
             | setting. Similarly, vaccination status in American COVID-
             | hospitalization research classifies people of unknown
             | vaccination status as unvaccinated. These people are often
             | homeless, isolated and elderly, or mentally unwell and
             | unable to provide reliable information to caregivers.
             | Again, likely unpleasant to work with.
             | 
             | Grouping these people as conspiratorial is unfair and seems
             | politically motivated. While you definitely have some
             | overlap with conspiratorial people, people have a right to
             | be skeptical of medical care, which is often incorrect and
             | potentially life threatening. Being able to explain things
             | concisely and with evidence is a core skill for a nurse,
             | much like being able to explain to someone why their
             | technical decisions are setting them up for failure is a
             | core skill for a software architect.
             | 
             | But from talking to nurses, this isn't the drive for
             | negative workplace satisfaction. Patients who are
             | hospitalized are less likely to be mentally stable: many
             | pathways to hospitalization come from extremely poor
             | decision making, and many of these people are repeatedly
             | hospitalized. Combine this with the fact that it's a very
             | physical job, primarily handled by women, and you have a
             | multi-faceted problem that's not as easy to solve as just
             | giving people right-think.
             | 
             | Personally I think the pathway to fixing this is
             | appropriately valuing nursing care, what is often a highly-
             | skilled profession with large physical, legal, and
             | downstream risk, and compensating people appropriately.
             | While nursing is a disproportionately paid job relative to
             | educational requirements, current compensation really
             | doesn't accurately account for just how demanding a job it
             | is.
             | 
             | The amount of nurses you see who become addicted to
             | painkillers, benzos, etc., is truly sad. Much like
             | teaching, it's an area where I feel that society is
             | inaccurately evaluating what the overall impact could be if
             | the role functioned well.
        
             | throttledagain2 wrote:
        
           | mfer wrote:
           | I've spoken with nurses who've had a variety of other jobs at
           | other types of places. They are consistent in telling me that
           | working as a nurse is a worse environment in the way they are
           | treated.
           | 
           | The example stories they have shared are the type of thing I
           | can't relate to and I've worked in software, general
           | engineering, food service, construction, and tech support (I
           | answered calls for 3 years).
        
             | omegaham wrote:
             | This is also my experience being married to a nurse. Any
             | story I have about a boss, coworker, or client being a
             | jerk, she has about five stories about someone being bad
             | enough that I'd already be shooting resumes toward anyone
             | who will take me.
             | 
             | She's been punched in the face by a patient, she's had
             | coworkers who sabotage each other due to personal
             | vendettas, she's had bosses go on racist tirades in
             | meetings, and on and on and on. As I remind my wife
             | whenever she has a particularly awful day, there's a reason
             | why the classic NP-hard CS problem is literally named the
             | Nurse Scheduling Problem[1]. And yes, she's considering a
             | career change.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nurse_scheduling_problem
        
               | bagels wrote:
               | Yes, my wife has also been punched working in the
               | hospital. She now does nursing by phone where people are
               | still really awful to her, but at least they can't
               | assault her.
        
           | literallyWTF wrote:
           | Yeah I don't know about that bud. Try telling the spouse of a
           | dying person that their half baked ideas they read on
           | Facebook aren't valid and tell me their meltdowns are
           | comparable to working retail.
           | 
           | All jobs suck donkey dick, but jobs directly dealing with
           | sick and dying people are on a different level.
        
           | germinalphrase wrote:
           | People who are sick, in pain, or possibly dying might be
           | slightly less emotionally regulated than your typical
           | customer.
        
             | brimble wrote:
             | It doesn't help that hospital systems tend to be garbage at
             | customer service, so the person's been told to wait an
             | indefinite (but always very long) period without any
             | indication of how long it'll be, and asked to tediously
             | fill out the same information five different times on five
             | different pieces of paper and iPads, all while feeling
             | terrible, before they finally snap at a poor nurse who
             | isn't to blame for their hospital being an uncaring money-
             | making machine with little regard for humanity.
        
               | alostpuppy wrote:
               | You didn't even mention the anxiety patients are enduring
               | over the billing the entire time.
        
               | MomoXenosaga wrote:
               | And now they will be billed even more because nobody
               | wants to do the job anymore!
               | 
               | Healthcare workers are not slaves they can quit after
               | all.
        
         | robertlagrant wrote:
         | We make really usable software for nurses, and they absolutely
         | love it. I think the effort we go to is totally unnecessary to
         | achieve that, as - just as you say - most medical software is
         | so bad from a user perspective.
         | 
         | Anyway, it's nice to make software like that :-)
        
         | tmp_anon_22 wrote:
         | > This one is big for product designers.
         | 
         | I think this is looking at the problem wrong. The problem is
         | that implementing positive change in these systems is
         | impossible for reasons far outside the control of any product
         | designer or developer currently on the team.
         | 
         | This software is old, has byzantine requirements, probably cut
         | costs all over the place, and conceived in a board room without
         | the benefit of an adequate development lifecycle or
         | stakeholders advocating for the users.
         | 
         | It probably takes 3 months to move a button around, and instead
         | of moving that button executives are having them push a feature
         | that earns a few more million, or a feature that the customers
         | want more then a UX improvement.
        
           | citizenpaul wrote:
           | >executives are having them push a feature that earns a few
           | more million
           | 
           | I've worked here before... Half our customers are complaining
           | about feature X that doesn't work right/ is inconvenient.
           | Exec: we don't care they are already paying us on a 3 year
           | contract. Hack this new feature into the program that a
           | potential new customer wants.
           | 
           | Horrible places to work they are. Thats why I avoid using any
           | long term contracts like the plague. The second I see call
           | for pricing I close the window.
        
           | mfer wrote:
           | > I think this is looking at the problem wrong. The problem
           | is that implementing positive change in these systems is
           | impossible for reasons far outside the control of any product
           | designer or developer currently on the team.
           | 
           | A developer working on something is different from a product
           | designer. For product designer I don't mean a UI/UX
           | developer. I mean someone empowered to design the thing. This
           | is often a leader or product manager.
           | 
           | Product design isn't something taught well in most schools.
           | It's often out of sight and mind. An engineer who was good at
           | building hardware or writing code didn't learn the skills
           | needed for product design through that. Product design
           | requires looking at the whole system differently.
           | 
           | > It probably takes 3 months to move a button around, and
           | instead of moving that button executives are having them push
           | a feature that earns a few more million, or a feature that
           | the customers want more then a UX improvement.
           | 
           | A better UX would reduce the amount of time nurses spend
           | using these systems. That productivity could be used to do
           | more other work (like taking on more patients). I don't like
           | this argument but it's easy to make in terms of cost
           | effectiveness.
           | 
           | I don't think the cost effective conversations are happening.
           | I expect there isn't that level of depth to these. It's hard
           | to do when a purchasing organization (like a hospital) only
           | have a few options and they are all bad.
           | 
           | This is an opportunity. To build software that is both
           | compliant and has a good UX. There's an opportunity to
           | disrupt all the crap software here.
        
             | tmp_anon_22 wrote:
             | I think what you're describing as the Product Designer who
             | can get shit done would need to be at the VP or C level to
             | actually accomplish this within an enterprise organization.
             | 
             | > I don't think the cost effective conversations are
             | happening.
             | 
             | I think it would take years to overhaul these products and
             | the conversations on that and how the price would roll down
             | hill to the healthcare organizations have happened, and
             | been summarily shut down.
             | 
             | I also think startups have tried to sell software via this
             | value prop but have not managed anything close to feature
             | parity or sales-org-maturity as the dominant enterprise
             | players.
             | 
             | > This is an opportunity.
             | 
             | I think various startups and other organizations are
             | _trying_ but there is a reason enterprise-style
             | organizations exist and dominant their various verticals.
             | 
             | Its not only about a good product, its about navigating
             | painfully expensive sales cycles of multi-year or even
             | near-decade, political wheeling and dealing at the
             | municipal, state, and federal levels, dealing with
             | compliance and legal liabilities etc.
             | 
             | > This is an opportunity.
             | 
             | Is it though? Hospitals still run. Yeah its expensive as
             | hell, nurses are quitting, but I don't see the horsemen of
             | the apocalypse quite yet. Healthcare outcomes are ok-ish.
             | Young people are still entering the medical field as a
             | viable profession.
        
             | ajmurmann wrote:
             | I think this might be more of a symptom of administration
             | being detached from the work on the ground. Even if one app
             | had UX that was significantly better (within the realm
             | what's possible within regulation. Others here make the
             | point that the laws and regulations make the UX
             | unregenerate bad), the sale might highly likely go to the
             | solution that has more checkboxes filled in the feature
             | table.
        
             | histriosum wrote:
             | > This is an opportunity. To build software that is both
             | compliant and has a good UX. There's an opportunity to
             | disrupt all the crap software here.
             | 
             | The thing that everyone is overlooking here is that EMR
             | software is not designed with patient outcomes as the top
             | priority. Every single EMR software I've seen in the field
             | has been designed with BILLING as the top priority --
             | everything is organized around making sure that you can
             | bill for the maximum number of services.
             | 
             | I don't think this can possibly change without regulation.
             | The incentives are all wrong at every other layer.
        
               | rectang wrote:
               | It is true that billing is a priority and there are
               | profit incentives at work. _That 's exactly why it's
               | worth it for hospitals to improve the data entry user
               | experience!_
               | 
               | Better documentation means more revenue. If your doctors
               | and nurses are not filling in the forms because the
               | interface isn't user friendly, you're losing money.
        
               | histriosum wrote:
               | > Better documentation means more revenue.
               | 
               | This is not actually the way the system works, as
               | currently designed, and so correspondingly this is not
               | how EMR systems are designed. The documentation that
               | matters is capturing the procedure codes and inventory
               | codes for billing -- and EMR systems and the associated
               | hospital workflows and security mechanisms are designed
               | around making sure that those billing codes must be
               | entered in order to do anything else.
        
               | rectang wrote:
               | I asked one of my Smarter Dx colleagues who's an expert
               | on this subject to clarify, and he had this to say:
               | 
               | > _There are 2 types of billing, even for hospitalized
               | patients. FFS and DRG based payments. Fee For Service
               | does depend on capturing those billing codes correctly.
               | But DRG based payments depend solely on documentation and
               | the billing codes are irrelevant. FFS is 2 /3s of US
               | health care spend currently ($2.6T) while DRG is $1.3T._
        
             | wtetzner wrote:
             | > A better UX would reduce the amount of time nurses spend
             | using these systems. That productivity could be used to do
             | more other work (like taking on more patients). I don't
             | like this argument but it's easy to make in terms of cost
             | effectiveness.
             | 
             | I don't think the companies developing the software care,
             | because they're getting paid either way.
        
         | redwall_hp wrote:
         | > Patients in COVID have become downright mean. Add this to the
         | problems nurses have management and doctors (who are often rude
         | and arrogant) and it's a poor culture.
         | 
         | So...this is also the biggest reason (besides lack of pay or
         | basic human dignity) that restaurants and retailers are having
         | a lot more trouble finding employees. Rude (and sometimes
         | violent) customers were already an issue, but they've become
         | absolute animals lately. It's increasingly bad for your own
         | health, mentally and physically, to have any public-facing job.
         | In the last few years, we've let go any pretense of expecting
         | people to be civil and reasonable, and adult children are
         | rewarded for their behavior instead of being trespassed.
         | 
         | Teachers are also quitting in droves (and in the middle of the
         | school year, in some cases) for the same reason. Children are
         | awful and the parents are worse. You risk sickness and
         | violence, and are constantly harassed by parents. Then there's
         | the whole attack on the curricula and book banning...
         | 
         | The FAA reported 1099 incidents with unruly passengers last
         | year, up from a normal 100-300 in prior years. Because some
         | sorts of people simply won't do what they're told...and
         | disobeying flight crew instructions is generally a federal
         | crime.
         | 
         | Everyone's increasingly overworked and underpaid, and they have
         | to deal with degenerates like that daily. Of course they want
         | out.
         | 
         | We're having a societal implosion.
        
           | kenjackson wrote:
           | Everyone thinks that their belligerence makes them Sam Adams
           | or Gandhi rather than just the jerk they likely are. I see
           | this every weekend at youth sporting events. I'm just like,
           | "it doesn't matter why -- if the ump says you need to leave,
           | just leave -- this isn't Game 7 of the World Series".
        
         | balozi wrote:
         | _> 4. Nurses are the catch all for jobs. Not enough aides?
         | Nurses do the work.... _
         | 
         | The nurses aides would argue that they do the majority of the
         | frontline work while getting paid a fraction of what the nurses
         | make, and get even less credit.
        
           | mfer wrote:
           | Most of the nurses I talk with speak about a lack of nurse
           | aides. When there isn't a nurse aide the nurses have to do
           | that work. When I speak of a lack of them I know nurses who
           | can go multiple consecutive shifts without an aide working
           | the floor. When they do work there is 1 aide to a floor and
           | can't cover everyone so the nurses do that work.
        
         | MomoXenosaga wrote:
         | Dont forget the sexual harassment. Twenty two year old nurse
         | and boomer men don't mix.
        
           | maestroia wrote:
           | Someone I dated last year has worked on the administrative
           | side of hospitals for years. Her statement was "everyone is
           | hooking up in them, and it's typically ignored. Unless they
           | use a patient bed, then all hell breaks loose."
        
         | ikiris wrote:
         | No one cares about ux in hospital purchasing _at all_ unless
         | it's an admin app.
        
         | e40 wrote:
         | On (3), Kaiser seems to be the exception to this. Their
         | systems, on the nurse/Dr side seem very easy to use and the
         | connections between different departments work seamlessly. At
         | least, from what I've noticed as a 10+ yr Kaiser patient in the
         | Bay Area.
        
         | rectang wrote:
         | > _3. IT systems that they have to use were designed by people
         | who have not talked with the workers who use them. They may
         | have been designed with laws and compliance in mind. Nurses
         | aren 't the people who choose or pay for these systems. But,
         | they use them a lot (maybe the most) and it's obvious they
         | weren't taken into account when designing the UX. It's
         | maddening for them._
         | 
         | > _This one is big for product designers. Often we listen to
         | the people who pay for it and miss out on the people who
         | actually have to use it._
         | 
         | This resonates with me strongly for two reasons. First my
         | mother is a retired RN, and the electronic record keeping was
         | her biggest frustration. It is hilarious to me how much my
         | mother hates computers, while I make a living in software.
         | 
         | Second, I'm now working for a startup, Smarter Dx (we're
         | hiring: https://angel.co/company/smarterdx/jobs ) that works
         | with these records and tries to make better use of them. To the
         | extent that we're successful, incentives are created for the
         | hospital to improve them, conceivably including improving the
         | UX that nurses see. I don't mean to underestimate the
         | difficulty of the problem, but I think it's possible to at
         | least push in the right direction.
        
         | woodruffw wrote:
         | This is a good summary, and it corresponds to what I've heard
         | from friends and acquaintances that are currently nurses (or
         | left recently).
         | 
         | (2) is a really perverse statistical phenomenon, and it's
         | unfortunate that nurses are bearing the brunt of our civic and
         | public information failures. It must be particularly soul-
         | draining to heal someone who resents the single thing that
         | would have protected them the most from needing hospitalization
         | in the first place.
        
         | cogman10 wrote:
         | The one I think you are missing is that nurses are and have
         | been overworked for a WHILE now. (that's what I get from
         | /r/nursing)
         | 
         | Hospitals have made sure they hire JUST ENOUGH nurses to cover
         | shifts and no more. With covid hitting, this blew out the
         | number of nurses needed resulting in a lot of "I know you've
         | already worked 60 hours, but can you do another 20? we are
         | short!".
         | 
         | Rather than hiring permanent people or upping salary, Hospitals
         | have instead elected to just use travel nurses and an extreme
         | premium so as to avoid any salary increases.
         | 
         | The fix is one that Hospital admins don't want. Pay your nurses
         | more and hire more than the minimum to cover shifts so a nurse
         | being out sick doesn't result in another working a 80 hour
         | week.
         | 
         | So, instead it's been day old pizza with superhero stickers.
        
           | jonlucc wrote:
           | I would add that travel nurses are treated better in a lot of
           | ways. Staff nurses must attend certain meetings and training
           | aimed at standardizing care and improving outcomes. The
           | travelers don't have to attend. Travelers can take off pretty
           | much any time they want as long as they know before they sign
           | the contract. Sure, they're considered "outsiders" by some
           | staff and sometimes get the less enticing patient
           | assignments, but for those drawbacks, they get paid 4x (I've
           | seen 3-8x staff rates, but 4x seems common) plus a housing
           | stipend as long as their location is more than some distance
           | (I think 40 miles iirc) from their "home" location. Why would
           | anyone be a staff nurse?
           | 
           | Anecdotally, I know a travel nurse who works in pediatric
           | ICUs (PICUs). One shift a couple months ago, the overnight
           | staff on her unit was >80% travelers. And this is in peds
           | units that aren't as affected by COVID, because ~1/2 of the
           | patients are cardiac babies with congenital heart issues. The
           | _only_ case I can see for not paying staff more to increase
           | retention is that they can respond to a dip in cases over the
           | summer, but that can 't possibly be an 80% decrease in
           | patients. Maybe they're waiting until travel rates come down
           | to offer an increase in pay so their 1.2x salary offer is
           | more enticing in comparison to the travel rates, but the
           | current system is ridiculous financially. I did mention that
           | we've seen first-hand that hospitals can afford to pay nurses
           | $4k/week, though, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who
           | noticed.
        
           | bumby wrote:
           | > _The fix is one that Hospital admins don 't want. Pay your
           | nurses more and hire more_
           | 
           | As someone who worked in hospitals to help redesign their
           | processes, this one piqued my interest.
           | 
           | For every project I worked on (and I mean literally every
           | one), the team lead wanted to jump to the solution that they
           | just need the ability to hire more people. In the rare
           | instances where they were able to convince hospital admins to
           | do so, it never fixed the problem. Not once.
           | 
           | Why? Because it never addressed the root causes. They needed
           | to take a process-oriented approach. There's a saying that
           | adding more people to a broken process makes things worse.
           | You can hide a lot of quality issues with inventory; if you
           | have a requirements for 100 widgets a day and you have a crap
           | process that only makes 10 quality widgets, you can meet your
           | goal by increasing throughput 10x, but nobody thinks that
           | would be a good approach. It's the same with injecting more
           | staff onto a broken system. If the system causes nurses to
           | spend disproportionate amounts of time on admin work and not
           | on direct patient care, it may be better to look at your
           | admin processes rather than just hire more nurses.
           | 
           | It's natural when people to feel overwhelmed to think the
           | solution is to just hire more people, but it's almost always
           | better to hold off on hiring until the system/process is
           | fixed.
           | 
           | Edit: I'm curious about the downvoting. I think it would help
           | illuminate the conversation if you could explain where your
           | disagreement lies. I'm basing my statements on actually
           | tracking when hiring was increased to the levels desired and
           | metrics did not improve.
        
             | ben0x539 wrote:
             | i think that argument works a lot better in a field where
             | they arent bullying people into working overtime near
             | constantly
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | Perhaps. But again, why is the overtime needed?
               | 
               | If it's because it provides more patient care beyond what
               | a nurse can provide in a good system, it might be a valid
               | point. But if it's because the system is fundamentally
               | broken, I'm skeptical that hiring more people will
               | actually fix anything. From personal experience, it will
               | only create a lag that will require the same need for
               | more hires down the road.
        
               | ben0x539 wrote:
               | if the overtime isnt needed let people go home after 6
               | hours each day
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | I think you're missing the point. Yes, if overtime isn't
               | needed people should be sent home. Hospitals agree on
               | this; they don't want to pay overtime if it's not needed.
               | 
               | The issue I'm pointing to is that sometimes it's "needed"
               | because of a bad process, like when there is redundant
               | work. Sometimes it's needed because the system needs
               | slack to compensate for disruptions in system dynamics.
               | Sometimes it's "needed" because "that's how we've always
               | done things." Point being, if it's needed, it should be
               | because it contributes directly to better patient
               | outcomes.
        
             | kedean wrote:
             | You're describing Brook's Law from The Mythical Man-Month.
             | It was an observation of collaboration in software
             | engineering specifically, and it cannot be applied
             | universally to every industry. Really, anything that is
             | highly parallel (medicine, teaching, stocking shelves,
             | waitstaff, deliveries) can benefit from hiring more people
             | until you reach saturation, and medicine isn't there or we
             | wouldn't be having the conversation.
             | 
             | The problems are caused by a "just in time" approach to
             | staffing, where you have exactly enough people to cover the
             | shifts at bare minimum. What solution would you suggest
             | _other_ than more people? They are not saying to throw more
             | nurses at patients simultaneously, they are saying to hire
             | more nurses so existing ones aren 't bound to spent the
             | entire week stretching themselves across the hospital.
             | 
             | Also, I think you are being downvoted because you are
             | applying software engineering rules to medicine.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | It's interesting because they aren't software engineering
               | rules. If anything, they are industrial engineering rules
               | that pre-date software and certainly older than the
               | mentioned book from 1975. The approach I was using was
               | developed specifically for healthcare and with great
               | effect in some organizations. I know this is HN, but I
               | think it's an error to assume everyone is coming at a
               | problem from a software perspective.
               | 
               | > _What solution would you suggest other than more
               | people?_
               | 
               | It obviously depends on the situation but most of the
               | time it comes down to reducing process waste. That may be
               | automation through software where a nurse was hired
               | specifically to only generate reports 40 hours a week, to
               | re-designing a layout that minimizes travel time for
               | nurses when they are delivering to patients. My
               | experience with the staffing situation is that managers
               | did not know how to staff to meet the needs of their
               | patient loads and just revert to simple heuristics that
               | left them understaffed at some times while being
               | overstaffed at others.
        
               | phil21 wrote:
               | > re-designing a layout that minimizes travel time for
               | nurses when they are delivering to patients.
               | 
               | I think talking about micro-optimizations like this
               | misses the forest through the trees.
               | 
               | It's neat and cool. Fun to wring out those last bits of
               | efficiency. But the fact you even need to discuss it
               | shows how hiring adequate amount of bedside staff is the
               | absolute last thing any medical system will do.
               | 
               | > revert to simple heuristics that left them understaffed
               | at some times while being overstaffed at others
               | 
               | Showing that they were better than modern day automated
               | shift planning.
               | 
               | I will submit that if your hospital floor staff is not
               | 50% idle on your average given fully-staffed boring day,
               | you are understaffed. Only extremely exceptional events
               | should cause your staff to be booked 100%. When it
               | happens it should be root cause analyzed and be immediate
               | cause for executive concern.
               | 
               | The trope of card playing nurses _should_ be true,
               | because of all industries there are - you want surge
               | capacity in healthcare. Both physically speaking in terms
               | of warm bodies available, as well as mentally speaking in
               | brains not being stressed to their max the entire shift.
        
           | stdgy wrote:
           | The rules nurses have to deal with around things as asinine
           | as taking PTO are AMAZING. They're required to put in PTO
           | requests months in advance and the hospital can and will say
           | "Sorry, denied. We don't have enough people..." As they are
           | intentionally creating skeleton crews of nurses to wring
           | every ounce of profit out of the business.
           | 
           | My mom was a nurse, my aunt was a nurse, my sister is a nurse
           | and my best friend's mom is a nurse. I really can't believe
           | anyone continues to be a nurse given the insane working
           | conditions these folks have to put up with. Twelve hour
           | shifts, overflowing with patients, watching newcomers earn
           | more than seasoned veterans... When I compare it to my laid
           | back software engineering job it's like I'm living in an
           | entirely different universe. The hospital industry is a
           | hugely demoralizing place.
        
             | a2tech wrote:
             | The hospital I work at requires physicians to file their
             | schedules 8 months in advance. The only deviation from that
             | is for emergencies. Unofficially there's a lot of flex for
             | them, but that's the official administration line.
        
             | cogman10 wrote:
             | Yeah, my mom was a small town nurse it was the same even
             | there. I gave them a bit more slack because it was a
             | hospital serving like 2000 people (so not really a high
             | profit place) but even there, there was a lot of last
             | minute "Oh no! People didn't show up for their christmas
             | shifts, could you come in please!"
        
           | ayngg wrote:
           | I actually think that this is just one example of many across
           | a ton of disciplines where people like Nurses basically are
           | forced to deal with costs and responsibilities offloaded onto
           | them from above the responsibility chain. Resources are eaten
           | up at the top of the chain to their benefit and costs are
           | offloaded down the chain until it reaches people like Nurses
           | at the end of the line who have to deal with it because there
           | is nobody else to offload it to. There is no shortage of
           | people wanting to be nurses (in some places it is extremely
           | competitive), and there is a huge demand for nurses based on
           | shortages everywhere, but somehow we are in a situation where
           | nurses are overworked because they are short staffed.
           | 
           | I look at academia which is rife with money sloshing around,
           | and see undergraduate classes are taught by grad students who
           | make ~30k a year who are basically the Nurses of the academic
           | world and treated like garbage. The justice system is
           | dysfunctional, courts systems are overwhelmed and
           | understaffed so criminals just enter and exit like a
           | revolving door, and police is basically useless because the
           | best they can do is taxi criminals into the system that
           | automatically spits them out again, while they take the brunt
           | of public criticism for how they are forced to deal with a
           | problem that is mostly beyond their scope.
           | 
           | In all of these cases it seems like the bottom if falling out
           | of these institutions, and the responsibilities have fallen
           | on their respective janitors to deal with it when the
           | solutions need to come from places that have been
           | incentivized to create the mess in the first place.
        
             | WalterBright wrote:
             | And yet the government budgets rise dramatically year after
             | year.
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | The government is one of the few places where you can get
               | a job in your twenties and retire comfortably in your 60s
               | having made a decent, but certainly not outstanding,
               | amount of money with consistent raises and cost of living
               | adjustments.
               | 
               | What some people will call government waste - other
               | people will call ethical employee treatment... sure there
               | are a lot of other sources of inefficiency outside of
               | your comment - but complaining about overpaid government
               | bureaucrats is essentially advocating for the same race-
               | to-the-bottom that has stagnated wages in large parts of
               | the labour pool.
        
               | fallingknife wrote:
               | It's not that they're paid too much. It's that they do
               | too little useful work.
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | A relative of mine works for a state level LEO targeting
               | financial crimes - they've spoken often about how
               | "smaller government" advocating politicians have
               | repeatedly hamstrung the organization when it tries to go
               | after large corporations. They've still managed to do
               | good work going after smaller scale offenders that fleece
               | investors - but I wouldn't put the blame on those
               | employees for doing work you don't find useful... it's
               | mostly up to politics.
        
               | andybak wrote:
               | I've worked public and private sector and know plenty of
               | people in both and I've not noticed a huge difference in
               | the number of people just coasting vs those who really
               | try to make a difference.
               | 
               | What makes you think government is that much worse than
               | the private sector in this regard?
        
             | johnnyanmac wrote:
             | > There is no shortage of people wanting to be nurses (in
             | some places it is extremely competitive), and there is a
             | huge demand for nurses based on shortages everywhere, but
             | somehow we are in a situation where nurses are overworked
             | because they are short staffed.
             | 
             | why is this such a common story across pretty much every
             | single industry? There's more people in the country than
             | 10, 20, 30 years ago. More customers, more money. Why do
             | they think they can handle more work with less workers
             | whose salary is less when adjusting for inflation?
        
               | heavyset_go wrote:
               | Owners and operators have learned that they can keep the
               | lights on by running their businesses with skeleton crews
               | and, at the same time, reap the rewards of lower costs as
               | profits.
        
               | chiefofgxbxl wrote:
               | They don't think they can handle more work with fewer
               | workers. It's just a profit squeeze, and someone else
               | pays the price.
        
             | TomSwirly wrote:
             | > courts systems are overwhelmed and understaffed so
             | criminals just enter and exit like a revolving door,
             | 
             | You're delusional. America has more people in jail, serving
             | longer sentences, than _any country in history_.
        
             | triska wrote:
             | I think this is due to Pournelle's _Iron Law of
             | Bureaucracy_ :
             | 
             | https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html
             | 
             | "In any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds
             | of people:
             | 
             | First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of
             | the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers
             | in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and
             | launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some
             | agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet
             | Union collective farming administration.
             | 
             | Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization
             | itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the
             | education system, many professors of education, many
             | teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters
             | staff, etc.
             | 
             | The Iron Law states that in every case the second group
             | will gain and keep control of the organization. It will
             | write the rules, and control promotions within the
             | organization."
        
               | TomSwirly wrote:
               | I had no idea that Pournelle was claiming credit for
               | that!
               | 
               | He nicked it from Robert Michels, who wrote about the
               | Iron Law of Oligarchies in 1911:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy
               | 
               | I was reading some old Analog magazines the other day,
               | and man, Pournelle was one deranged man in his "non-
               | fiction".
        
               | tomrod wrote:
               | You just explained something I saw on many establishing
               | subreddits!
        
               | TomSwirly wrote:
               | Here's the original author:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | ayngg wrote:
               | Thanks for the link, I'll check it out.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | As somebody with experience at NASA, this made me
               | chortle. I would NOT characterize the average civil
               | servant that I worked with as "devoted to the goals of
               | the organization." That includes the lowest level field
               | organizations. Unfortunately, for the average employee,
               | it eventually gets treated like any other job.
               | 
               | It's possible this dichotomy works in theory only. Being
               | generous, it's possible they just disagree about the
               | goals of the organization.
        
               | avianlyric wrote:
               | That's the point. The second group, those who only care
               | about the existence of the organisation, and the
               | power/money it provides to them, have taken over at NASA.
               | 
               | As a result only those who act to increase the
               | power/wealth at the expense of all else, such as the
               | original goals of the organisation, get promoted and hang
               | around. The end result, an organisation that achieves
               | very little, and consumes huge amounts of resources, full
               | of people who really don't care about the fundamental
               | goals of the organisation.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | Ok, I see your point and think you're right. The quote
               | distinguished between scientists/technicians and
               | management. I met many in the former group who cared
               | little about the goals of the organization, but to your
               | point, they had been within the organization a long time.
        
               | armchairhacker wrote:
               | Nurses, teachers, charity workers, IEPs, game devs.
               | 
               | These are all jobs where people sign up _for the job_.
               | Whether it's altruism or genuine passion. They're willing
               | to compromise and put up with less pay and harder working
               | conditions.
               | 
               | But because they're willing to compromise, these people
               | are _pushed to their limit_. With not only low pay and
               | shit conditions, but higher-ups which actively exploit
               | their altruism and passion. "If you don't work, patients
               | / children are going to suffer!" coming from the same
               | beaurocracy which created the situation where a) they
               | suffer or b) you work extra hours.
               | 
               | They're being pushed past the limit in fact, which is why
               | there's now a nursing and teaching shortage despite these
               | actually being popular fields. A lot of people want to
               | work these professions, they just don't want the jobs.
        
               | HWR_14 wrote:
               | This is the same reason why startups often phrase what
               | they are trying to do as "change the world" and not
               | "become filthy rich" to their employees.
        
             | n0on3 wrote:
             | This. So much this. In so many fields, it's actually hard
             | to find one where this is not the case.
        
             | notch656a wrote:
             | I don't disagree nurses DESERVE to be paid more (I'm not
             | sure if the economics bear out but they're certainly as
             | WORTHY as many other professions), but wouldn't the fact
             | that these nurses continue to work in nursing despite
             | considering leaving bolster the argument even further that
             | they are receiving adequate compensation?
             | 
             | Staying when you want to leave indicates there's enough
             | compensation to 'make it worth it' at least versus whatever
             | shitty alternatives you have. Leaving when you want to
             | stay, to me, would be a much bigger indicator that nurses
             | who want to stay in the profession can't because of
             | wage/benefits/conditions issues.
        
               | alexashka wrote:
               | That's not how the real world works.
               | 
               | People don't 'switch careers' when they've spent years
               | getting good at it. What they do instead is sit around
               | posting on HackerNews and fucking the dog in all sorts of
               | other ways.
               | 
               | Do you realize the irony of it all? This place gets like
               | 1/10th the traffic on weekends. That's not a coincidence.
        
               | tetraca wrote:
               | > Staying when you want to leave indicates there's enough
               | compensation to 'make it worth it' at least versus
               | whatever shitty alternatives you have. Leaving when you
               | want to stay, to me, would be a much bigger indicator
               | that nurses who want to stay in the profession can't
               | because of wage/benefits/conditions issues.
               | 
               | I think the conclusion of this sort of economic thinking
               | is basically: Give your employees just enough money that
               | they can keep they keep their head above the water but
               | not enough to flourish, and just enough
               | pressure/responsibility that they don't have energy to do
               | anything else, but not too much that they have a complete
               | mental breakdown that leaves them with the conclusion
               | that they should leave your industry at any cost.
               | 
               | When you spent a lot of time and money into a specialized
               | and demanding career, I imagine it practically very
               | difficult to actually change your career, even if it's
               | killing you. It's probably even worse if you have
               | familial obligations. You likely do not have time or
               | energy to better your situation after hours, and if you
               | quit, you potentially resign yourself (perhaps) to many
               | years of destitution while you accumulate the necessary
               | knowledge to do something else. I would not be surprised
               | if many people just bear bad conditions because the cost
               | to do anything else worth one's time is simply too high.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | Employers are going to pay the minimum wages they can in
               | order to retain sufficient workers. They obviously aren't
               | going to voluntarily pay extra just so that employees can
               | flourish.
               | 
               | There are a lot of jobs openings available to someone
               | with an RN certificate and some experience. Unemployment
               | in that group is close to zero. They don't all work in
               | direct patient care roles.
        
               | landemva wrote:
               | Many can't afford to not work due to debt/rent/child
               | support payments. If you don't pay rent you lose the
               | apartment and the weekend parenting time. Miss the child
               | support payments which were being taken from paycheck and
               | child support enforcement takes driver license and starts
               | process to take the car that is in your name.
               | 
               | Many people don't have even a little optionality.
        
               | notch656a wrote:
               | That's actually my point. IF they are able to meet their
               | obligations in nursing and their job is literally such a
               | superior option to all the alternatives that they don't
               | have 'optionality' then it's a weird flex to be angry at
               | your one best(least bad) option that actually pays your
               | rent and child support. Be angry that the alternatives
               | aren't as good as the nursing gig you have.
               | 
               | I definitely feel for those paying child support, because
               | 'imputed income' means you must pay at whatever rate the
               | judge thinks you can make the best money at. You can
               | never take a more relaxing lower paying job, because it
               | will result in your imprisonment. Those people really
               | have no future in the US -- their only option to throttle
               | back their income is suicide, leave the country, or wait
               | to go to jail. I blame society for the existence of these
               | debtor's prisons, not nursing employers.
        
               | landemva wrote:
               | Seems you understand the more income -> more support
               | trap. Mandatory overtime is considered in support
               | calculations. That sets high water mark so going back to
               | 40/hours week does not lower payments. I learned the hard
               | way, and last employer I regularly sent email to boss
               | thanking them for opportunity to work voluntary overtime.
               | I would subpoena the boss's response of 'yes' for
               | evidence in child support hearing to only use 40/hours
               | week. The courts and county child support enforcement are
               | wicked and liars.
        
               | notch656a wrote:
               | Yes that never made the slightest sense to me. As someone
               | married with a kid, when I get a raise or bonus it goes
               | to my retirement -- not as a change in quality of life
               | for a child who already has food/shelter/education. The
               | kid still gets the same amount now as when I made
               | significantly less. The idea that a kid needs more money
               | because you worked overtime is quite possibly one of the
               | dumbest ideas I've ever heard.
        
               | Sakos wrote:
               | Are you familiar with the US? I don't see how you can in
               | good faith argue that if people don't like what they have
               | to do and/or what they get paid for it, they can just go
               | do something else.
        
               | ayngg wrote:
               | I am not really specifically making an argument on their
               | salaries, I guess I am saying that Nurses are in the
               | position where they have the least leverage in the system
               | so they end up bearing a lot of the responsibilities that
               | should be held elsewhere while having a disproportionate
               | amount of resources allocated to them.
               | 
               | In healthcare I get the feeling that a lot of workers
               | feel stuck in that there are many patients and people
               | depending on them, and to leave would sort of be like
               | abandoning them while increasing the burden on ex-
               | cowoerkers.
        
               | pojzon wrote:
               | Most of those ppl cannot leave due to various
               | obligations.
               | 
               | If you want to see an indocator of terrible compensation
               | - check why pretty much noone (at least here) wants to be
               | a nurse.
               | 
               | Profession is rapidly aging because new ppl are not
               | joining. And they are not joining because work is hard
               | and pay is terrible.
               | 
               | The whole Healthcare system if we dont get robots in
               | place fast is going to crumble soon like a house of
               | cards.
        
               | maxerickson wrote:
               | The US has lots of people interested in nursing and not
               | enough infrastructure to turn them into nurses:
               | 
               | https://www.npr.org/sections/health-
               | shots/2021/10/25/1047290...
               | 
               | The work is hard, but the pay is well above many other
               | jobs and there are jobs everywhere.
        
             | KarlKemp wrote:
             | This reads too much like a generalization of the standard
             | complaints about management and their stupid meetings, the
             | basic thesis of that web comic that was neither funny nor
             | true, Dilbert.
             | 
             | The criminal justice system may be overwhelmed, but its
             | reaction certainly isn't to just let criminals "exit like a
             | revolving door". The US is still incarcerating people at
             | 10x the rate of other wealthy countries.
             | 
             | Nurses being overworked is simply due to there not being
             | enough nurses. It matters little if there's too much
             | bureaucracy somewhere, or if too much money is spent on
             | pharmaceuticals (about twice as expensive as anywhere else)
             | or if doctors make too much money or if the US has a
             | uniquely unhealthy population.
        
               | johnnyanmac wrote:
               | >Nurses being overworked is simply due to there not being
               | enough nurses.
               | 
               | yes but this begs the obvious question of "why?", which
               | either leads to the immediate thoughts of
               | 
               | 1. not enough people want to be nurses 2. companies don't
               | want to hire more nurses
               | 
               | I'm assuming #1 is false, so #2 is the go-to conclusion,
               | at least on the high level. I'm sure I'm missing some
               | more nuanced #3/4/5 explanations, but it does seem to
               | ultimately come down to money that isn't being spent (be
               | it maliciously or simply due to not having the budget).
        
               | pessimizer wrote:
               | Dilbert wasn't a webcomic, it was in the paper.
        
           | linsomniac wrote:
           | In cases I'm familiar with, they aren't hiring JUST ENOUGH
           | nurses, they are hiring AS FEW NURSES as they can get away
           | with. More like half as many as they should. IIRC, nurse-to-
           | patient ratio should be around 1:5, but it can often be more
           | like 1:10 or worse.
           | 
           | On top of that, they also hire as few orderlies and nursing
           | assistants as possible, so the nurse doesn't even have anyone
           | to offload things to, and ends up having to do more work on
           | more patients.
           | 
           | This has been a problem well before the pandemic.
           | 
           | It's a trope among nurses that they are so busy they don't
           | have time to use the bathroom, let alone eat lunch.
           | 
           | Source: My wife is a nurse, most of her friends are nurses,
           | and she left the profession ~a year before the pandemic
           | because of exactly these issues.
        
           | eigen wrote:
           | and now nurses are apparently solely responsible for medical
           | errors and will not be supported by their employer. the cause
           | of which appears to be related to #3 in GP above where
           | overrides are a regular occurrence and quickly loose meaning
           | if you have to do it multiple times per day.
           | 
           | https://khn.org/news/article/radonda-vaught-fatal-drug-
           | error...
        
           | tom-thistime wrote:
           | Yeah, anecdotally, experienced nurses were fed up in the
           | mid-1980s.
        
             | HWR_14 wrote:
             | Do you have anything I can see about that, or did you just
             | know people who were fed up and retired then.
        
           | conductr wrote:
           | Yes and No.
           | 
           | On an individual basis, nurses are overworked because they
           | choose to be and their employers allow for it. The standard
           | work week is 3 12 hour shifts, which is much less than most
           | professionals work. Like a retail or warehouse worker, they
           | are expected to clock out as soon as possible and leave when
           | the shift ends. Those of us with salary jobs knows how
           | difficult that can be in our arrangements and how much "free"
           | work we end up performing. They get paid premiums for
           | everything; night, weekend, etc. And since they're hourly,
           | they typically LIKE the overtime and signup for it as much as
           | possible. They also might work FT at one hospital and pull
           | extra shifts at another hospital on a PRN basis. These things
           | are very common. Just like in a retail environment, people
           | typically LIKE to work holidays so long as it's voluntary
           | because it's 1.5x pay (or more?).
           | 
           | > Rather than hiring permanent people or upping salary,
           | Hospitals have instead elected to just use travel nurses and
           | an extreme premium so as to avoid any salary increases.
           | 
           | This makes no sense. Capacity is the problem, paying more for
           | the same capacity does not solve the problem. Hospitals try
           | very hard to avoid overtime and the travel nurses due to the
           | cost. It's also a very elastic model to balance and a lot of
           | flex (non Full Time) folks are needed to fill the gaps and
           | manage cost somewhat.
           | 
           | > The fix is one that Hospital admins don't want. Pay your
           | nurses more and hire more than the minimum to cover shifts so
           | a nurse being out sick doesn't result in another working a 80
           | hour week.
           | 
           | That is the current system. The problem is usually time. If
           | someone calls in sick, they do it an hour before their shift
           | starts. They usually can solve for this. Either they call
           | from their roster or a supervisor level person with an active
           | RN license steps into the clinical side that day. Staffing at
           | 2x just in case everyone calls in makes no sense. Staffing at
           | 5x just in case a pandemic hits makes no sense.
           | 
           | Hospitals barely make money as it is, I don't see how this is
           | a sustainable solution. Paying more does not create capacity
           | in this industry.
           | 
           | It's also important to note that "nurse" is a very generic
           | term. For example, ICU nurses is a very distinct type of
           | nurse that has been dealing with COVID first hand (caring for
           | vent patients). They are the ones you hear about making
           | $150-200/hour in COVID times. It is difficult to become an
           | ICU nurse. It hasn't been possible for a surgical nurse to
           | pivot to ICU nurse in these times so the labor pool has been
           | rather fixed, or shrinking due to natural churn and inability
           | to onboard new folks. It would be akin to suggesting why does
           | some [insert super specific domain expertise] developer make
           | $1M/year at FAANG when they could hire a PHP coder for
           | $15/hour on a freelance website. There is no immediate/cheap
           | substitute for the experience and knowledge that the
           | expensive developer has, so they cost more. This is happening
           | in nursing where some are thriving while many actually got
           | furloughed early on in the pandemic.
           | 
           | My personal opinion on the matter, is one only has to look at
           | the demographics of an average nurse. It's become quite "old"
           | and like other industries, the boomer's retiring is causing a
           | labor issue. The handful of nurses that made 5-10 years of
           | salary since Q1.2020 are now ready to retire early as well. I
           | don't blame them.
        
             | robonerd wrote:
             | > _Capacity is the problem_
             | 
             | Capacity is generally limited by staffing, not space or
             | actual beds. When hospitals report how many "beds" they
             | have available, they're generally not talking about the
             | furniture.
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | They are absolutely talking about actual physical beds.
               | The bed is licensed by the state and inspected by a
               | regulator and is an indication of how many patients can
               | stay in the hospital. As as been shown these years, they
               | can and will pay what is needed, finding qualified people
               | is the hardest part.
        
               | robonerd wrote:
               | If a hospital has 200 beds but only enough nurses to
               | staff 100 of them, they have "100 beds".
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | Maybe to you, but officially you have 200 beds at 50%
               | occupancy. If needed, nurses can be added by other means.
               | For example, the army, FEMA, etc. will ship in nurses and
               | just need to know if the bed is physically there and
               | certified for use.
        
               | robonerd wrote:
               | > For example, the army, FEMA, etc. will ship in nurses
               | 
               |  _Might_ ship in more nurses, and until they do, the beds
               | that can 't be staffed don't count towards capacity.
               | 
               | > _50% occupancy_
               | 
               | Having the capacity to staff those beds is not the same
               | as the beds being occupied. Beds are occupied by
               | patients, not nurses.
        
             | thebradbain wrote:
             | "Hospitals barely make money as it is, I don't see how this
             | is a sustainable solution. Paying more does not create
             | capacity in this industry."
             | 
             | The problem is - and this may be very bizarre in a society
             | as capitalistic as the US - healthcare should not be
             | beholden to making a profit.
             | 
             | Rehabilitating people is clearly "valuable" to the economy
             | in that without people to participate in the economic
             | system, a debt-based economy collapses; I'd argue that
             | healthcare is much more valuable to capitalism than is
             | reflected on a balance sheet of paper
             | costs/revenues/profits, and yet a system such as ours has
             | absolutely no way in its current form to price that in
             | (sure, in an academic defense you could wave hands that
             | "positive externalities" such as these should be priced in
             | to the model, but it's clear with the racket the medical
             | industry has found itself in that will never happen
             | practically).
             | 
             | The main issue profit-seeking conflicts with is that whole
             | rehabilitating/healing/saving people is an intrinsically
             | good thing to do, and that letting people who have full
             | lives to live die or suffer is an intrinsically bad thing
             | to do.
             | 
             | What's not sustainable is that healthcare has to survive
             | within the confines of a system that is many times in
             | complete opposition to it. Other otherwise-capitalist
             | countries have at least _tried_ to insulate their
             | healthcare industry from market forces, meanwhile the US
             | has just wrapped it in another layer of capitalism with its
             | insurance market.
        
             | landemva wrote:
             | It makes sense to the $250k/year hospital chief bureaucrat
             | (not a medical person) and the Pres. and board accept that
             | the extra contractor pay is just short term.
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | So are pandemics if you look at it that way
        
               | landemva wrote:
               | It was great for revenue. Hospitals got paid for using
               | Remdesivir, which has no approved medical use anywhere
               | worldwide and had a test on Ebola virus patients halted
               | because it was killing faster than the Ebola virus.
               | https://www.cms.gov/medicare/covid-19/new-
               | covid-19-treatment...
               | 
               | ' October 22, 2020, the FDA approved remdesivir (Veklury)
               | for the treatment of COVID-19 for adults and certain
               | pediatric patients requiring hospitalization '
               | 
               | That stuff is lethal.
               | https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/gilead-mulls-
               | repositio...
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | Hospitals receive very little revenue for administering
               | remdesivir. It's not a material item on their financial
               | statements.
        
           | BeetleB wrote:
           | > Rather than hiring permanent people or upping salary,
           | Hospitals have instead elected to just use travel nurses and
           | an extreme premium so as to avoid any salary increases.
           | 
           | In case people want an idea of what travel nurses made during
           | COVID...
           | 
           | https://khn.org/news/highly-paid-traveling-nurses-fill-
           | staff...
           | 
           | > In April, she packed her bags for a two-month contract in
           | then-COVID hot spot New Jersey, as part of what she called a
           | "mass exodus" of nurses leaving the suburban Denver hospital
           | to become traveling nurses. Her new pay? About $5,200 a week,
           | and with a contract that required adequate protective gear.
           | 
           | > Months later, the offerings -- and the stakes -- are even
           | higher for nurses willing to move. In Sioux Falls, South
           | Dakota, nurses can make more than $6,200 a week. A recent
           | posting for a job in Fargo, North Dakota, offered more than
           | $8,000 a week. Some can get as much as $10,000.
        
             | jonlucc wrote:
             | These contracts are likely emergency contracts, which pay
             | outrageously but often require a full week of 12-hour
             | shifts or something similar with the expectation the nurse
             | will only do one week then recover. I've seen this for
             | COVID peaks and when a hospital's entire nursing staff is
             | planning to strike. The $5200/wk rate is more likely 3 or 4
             | 12-hour shifts.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | I'm not sure I follow:
               | 
               | > The $5200/wk rate is more likely 3 or 4 12-hour shifts
               | 
               | 3 or 4 12 hour shifts a week is normal for salaried
               | nurses. $5200/wk isn't. It's over double.
               | 
               | > which pay outrageously but often require a full week of
               | 12-hour shifts or something similar with the expectation
               | the nurse will only do one week then recover.
               | 
               | I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Yes, it may be a
               | full week of 12 hour shifts, but it's still a much higher
               | pay. And if you get the next week off, it's a _fantastic_
               | deal.
               | 
               | For context, pre-pandemic, I knew a nurse who often would
               | do this schedule for her salaried job - she requested it
               | as she liked having a full week off.
               | 
               | What I mentioned elsewhere: Travel nurses have a lot more
               | control over the contracts they take. They can work fewer
               | hours per year and still make significantly more. They
               | may have stretches of long hours in a given contract, but
               | annually they work less.
        
               | jonlucc wrote:
               | > 3 or 4 12 hour shifts a week is normal for salaried
               | nurses. $5200/wk isn't. It's over double.
               | 
               | It's a normal shift schedule, and they pay travel nurses
               | much more than staff nurses to work the same shift
               | schedule. These are typically 3 month contracts, but not
               | always.
               | 
               | > I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Yes, it may be
               | a full week of 12 hour shifts, but it's still a much
               | higher pay. And if you get the next week off, it's a
               | fantastic deal.
               | 
               | I don't disagree, but a lot of people do not want to work
               | (or feel like they can't provide good care for) 12 hours
               | every day for a week.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | Ah I see - we're in agreement!
        
             | ben0x539 wrote:
             | How many working hours are in those weeks?
        
               | jonlucc wrote:
               | I replied to the parent, but the highest quotes are
               | probably emergency contracts for 5 or 7 shifts of 12
               | hours but only for a week. Longer contracts are often 3
               | months at 3 or 4 shifts per week.
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | I haven't found concrete figures, but from what I've
               | read, they do often work more hours during the contract.
               | However, travel nurses in general have far more control
               | over their schedule than regular salaried nurses. A
               | salaried nurse cannot refuse to work, but travel nurses
               | routinely say "No" to contracts if they don't like the
               | pay or the hours.
               | 
               | What happens is they'll accept a few weeks (or 2 months)
               | of long hours, and then take a month off and relax. As
               | you can imagine, if they're getting paid $6000/week, they
               | can easily take a lot of time off and still get paid more
               | annually than their salaried counterparts (while overall
               | working fewer hours per year).
        
             | pbuzbee wrote:
             | Travel nursing is definitely a great way to turn the tables
             | if you can do it. The money you can make is clearly quite
             | high! I fully support those nurses using travel nursing to
             | get greater pay.
             | 
             | But it also isn't an option for everyone. Many don't have
             | the flexibility to switch to travel nursing. For example,
             | you may not be able to get a nearby contract and may not be
             | able to travel (e.g. because you have children). Plus,
             | traveling isn't an option for new nurses without
             | experience, who now have to work in hospitals that are
             | hemorrhaging experienced nurses to traveling AND have worse
             | staffing ratios than ever.
        
           | ARandomerDude wrote:
           | > Hospitals have made sure they hire JUST ENOUGH nurses to
           | cover shifts and no more.
           | 
           | This is a two-edged sword. If you hire more than you need,
           | the nurses' hours will be cut during normal situations and
           | they won't make enough money. If hospitals don't cut extra
           | hours and instead keep the staff on the clock, a public
           | scandal will erupt surrounding well-paid medical
           | professionals sitting around doing nothing.
        
             | runnerup wrote:
             | You can pay people fixed monthly salary + overtime hours.
             | You don't need to cut their hours and their pay, though
             | that's often the choice that employers make.
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | Exactly, choosing to cut hours or pay due to a lull in
               | business is a choice made by the employer. It's not like
               | these hospitals are sputtering along right at the fringe
               | of solvency and one bad choice will bankrupt them -
               | private health providers tend to make pretty comfortable
               | profit margins and the fact that they can pay such
               | outrageous surge prices for travel nurses is a pretty
               | clear proof of how much they have to spare.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | Many hospitals literally are sputtering along right at
               | the fringe of solvency. This is particularly a problem
               | with non-profit hospitals in poor and rural areas. Summer
               | have shut down in recent years, and the pandemic is
               | accelerating that trend.
               | 
               | https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/12-latest-
               | hosp...
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | _Some_ hospitals are sputtering right along, and a list
               | of 12 isn 't a great piece of evidence that those
               | hospitals (many of which are run by regional
               | organizations which are essentially consolidating patient
               | pools into a central location) are being run effectively
               | - especially if these hospitals are paying 10k/week for
               | travel nurses.
               | 
               | If there's a location that isn't profitable to operate a
               | hospital in then the hospital will probably fail. America
               | is the country still clinging to market-driven healthcare
               | services and the market can be a cruel mistress.
               | 
               | And all that doesn't at all erode the fact that nurses
               | are paid pauper's wages at extremely profitable hospitals
               | - some tech companies are going out of business, some
               | probably closed their doors today... that doesn't mean
               | that all engineers are expected to work for 60hrs/week at
               | $15/hr.
        
               | nradov wrote:
               | That article was just a recent example. If you search
               | around you can find many other hospitals which have
               | closed down or gone through bankruptcy in recent years.
               | 
               | https://www.gpb.org/news/2022/04/08/wellstar-closing-er-
               | hosp...
               | 
               | https://www.post-
               | gazette.com/opinion/editorials/2022/04/04/c...
               | 
               | In 2020 the US median salary for an RN was $75K. That was
               | well above the median household income. Hardly pauper's
               | wages.
               | 
               | Most hospitals are not extremely profitable. In fact the
               | majority are run by governments or non-profit
               | organizations.
               | 
               | https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/hospitals-by-
               | owner...
               | 
               | Tech companies will pay engineers as little as they can
               | get away with. Expectations have nothing to do with it.
               | Wages are set by the market.
        
             | tinco wrote:
             | > a public scandal will erupt surrounding well-paid medical
             | professionals sitting around doing nothing
             | 
             | I don't think that's true. Increasing the amount of nurses
             | means simply increasing the amount of care. If you have
             | twice as many nurses, you'll have twice as much care for
             | your patients. No way nurses would be sitting around doing
             | nothing.
        
               | coryrc wrote:
               | That's not how healthcare works. That it is does not
               | function that way is why free-at-point-of-use public
               | healthcare systems are capable of working.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | Not sure why you're being downvoted, but the idea that
               | doubling nurses doubles the amount of patient care shows
               | an ignorance of the healthcare system. "Patient care" is
               | a nebulous term and needs to be further defined in that
               | statement. Do you now get two catheters instead of one?
               | Or get your vitals taken twice as often? Both double
               | patient care but only one is relevant.
        
               | Firmwarrior wrote:
               | I could definitely imagine nurses having twice as much
               | time to carefully read my charts, or twice as much time
               | to sleep at night and be well rested so they don't fuck
               | things up, or being able to come by and help with
               | something twice as quickly
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | That would provide better patient outcomes, I agree.
               | Whether hiring more nurses translates to actually
               | doubling that, is another question. To be clear, I'm not
               | saying that increased staff is not part of the solution;
               | it's just been my experience that it's rarely the sole
               | part (or often even the majority part) of the solution.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | It's because it would actually double the amount of care
               | on most floors, because they're usually at 60% of the
               | staffing they need as a start because they've been able
               | to get away with that for years.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | That doesn't really answer the question. "it would
               | actually double the amount of care". It would double the
               | amount of staff hours. How those staff hours are used is
               | a measure of patient care and not all hours are equally
               | relevant to the patient.
               | 
               | As an example, if we assume you are a software engineer
               | and you double your work hours, will you double your code
               | output? Probably not, just like it's not a 1:1
               | translation of nurse hours to patient care.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | Comments like this are showing just how much you don't
               | understand maintaining a service level based care, and
               | are stuck in thinking in terms of producing a product.
               | 
               | Combined with willfully ignoring that basically all
               | floors are intentionally understaffed and have been for
               | _years_.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | I can tell you from my years in healthcare that many of
               | the people who think they know how the system works only
               | have a very myopic understanding and they usually are the
               | one's who have the most confidence that their simple
               | solution will fix the problem. Unfortunately, there's a
               | lot of nuance in complex systems like healthcare.
               | 
               | We probably agree about the staffing levels to an extent,
               | but I would be curious to hear the staffing estimation
               | methodologies used in your experience.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | Yeah, I agree. You sound like many healthcare admins I've
               | worked with and for.
               | 
               | I'm not sure its the flex in this argument you think it
               | is.
        
               | bumby wrote:
               | I wasn't healthcare admin and most of my department was
               | staffed with nurses. But we were very data oriented and
               | it helped buffer us from emotional responses to problems.
        
             | tomc1985 wrote:
             | At the rate that healthcare charges in the US, hospitals
             | can more than afford to keep X+1 or +2 needed nurses around
             | in three 8-hour shifts. They just don't.
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | Not even close. Most hospitals have trouble staying
               | afloat as is. And there are disciplines within nursing,
               | so you'd have to overstaff by quite a bit more such that
               | closer to 2x is a backup but leads back to the GP's
               | point.
               | 
               | They employ on-call, PRN, contract nurses, etc to fill in
               | the gaps which mostly works in non-pandemic situations.
        
               | a2tech wrote:
               | Reading threads like this really hammers home most of HN
               | have never worked in health care. Hospitals BARELY make
               | their budget. 1% over cost of doing business is
               | considered a really good year for my institution.
               | 
               | Also if I never have to hear people complain about
               | bloated admin budgets in education and healthcare ever
               | again it'll be too soon. Those admins aren't sitting
               | around on their thumbs--they're dealing with the
               | ridiculous legal and administrative system the insurance
               | companies and government have created. Those people are
               | absolutely critical for the institution to exist.
        
               | jonlucc wrote:
               | Hospitals have been paying 4x staff rates for travel
               | nurses for multiple years now, though.
        
               | bri3d wrote:
               | This seems to be highly bifurcated, like so much in the
               | US, between the haves and the have-nots. But overall I
               | don't think it's fair to say "Hospitals BARELY make their
               | budget." As usual, the whole system is broken. There are
               | some hospitals with a wealthy customer base with full-
               | ride insurance who can bill obscene amounts and profit
               | massively, and then there are some hospital systems with
               | uninsured and underinsured customer bases who are just
               | scraping by.
               | 
               | I looked up my local hospital network, UCHealth
               | (Colorado, there are many UCHealths it would seem), and
               | their EBITDA in 2021 was 16.6%. Mayo Clinic posted 1.2
               | billion dollars in _operating profit_ in 2021, and also
               | have a gigantic investing arm with several billion
               | dollars under management.
               | 
               | Then we look at networks like Spectrum in Michigan, who
               | posted only a 3.6% margin, or Henry Ford, with a negative
               | operating margin offset by investment income, and it
               | becomes clear that _some_ hospitals barely make their
               | budget while _others_ rake in dollars.
        
               | tomc1985 wrote:
               | How badly is the entire industry mismanaged if hospitals
               | have to charge thousands-to-millions of dolllars for
               | treatments? There is no possible way that is just barely
               | supporting facilities+medical staff+reasonable
               | administration+liabilities if other countries can do it
               | at tiny fractions of our price.
               | 
               | Instead, the story as I've heard it seems to be similar
               | to education: massive administrative overhead permitted
               | by fundamentally broken insurance billing.
               | 
               | Sure I may not know healthcare but they really need to
               | fix their shit.
        
           | mgr86 wrote:
           | My Daughter was born on the winter solstice this year. We had
           | a broken sink in our hospital room and someone came by to fix
           | it. He had a trainee with him. Who was mentioning that he was
           | scheduled to work New Years Eve and then again the next day
           | on New years day. A 3rd shift followed by an immediate 1st
           | shift. He was casually talking to the guy training him and
           | mentioned that had to be a mistake. The guy in charge said
           | something like "what did I tell you. _They_ don 't care about
           | you". I sure felt angry for both of them at that moment.
        
             | nradov wrote:
             | Hospitals operate 24x7. Someone has to work those shifts.
             | Usually it ends up being the employee with the least
             | seniority. What's the alternative?
        
               | krisoft wrote:
               | The problem is not that they had to work on those days.
               | 
               | The problem is that they had two consecutive shifts.
               | 
               | The alternative is that the hospital hires enough people
               | so they can schedule them such that everybody has time to
               | go home relax and sleep after they are done with a shift.
        
               | dham wrote:
               | My first year at the movie theater I had to work
               | Christmas Eve, Day, New years eve and day, all for
               | minimum wage. People are just more entitled now a days.
        
               | krisoft wrote:
               | Did you go home and sleep between working on on new years
               | eve and new years day? If yes then what you had is not
               | what the complaint is about.
        
           | ikiris wrote:
           | for those that aren't aware, a while here reads as at least
           | 40 years, and it gets worse every year, especially the last
           | 10 or so.
           | 
           | With additional nuance that this kind of thing used to be
           | protected a bit by the additional guard of a pharmacist. The
           | automated dispensary changed those criminally liable people
           | into a checkbox bypass that this nurse (and from the sounds
           | of it, the rest of them by effect of policy) regularly
           | bypassed.
        
           | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
           | This ended up being the last straw for one of my friends who
           | was a nurse.
           | 
           | He kept getting vacation requests denied due to lack of
           | staffing, yet if he asked if they were looking to hire, the
           | answer was always No.
           | 
           | He was super lucky and had some early cryptocurrency
           | investments pay off big, so he decided he was done with it
           | retired. He said that he loved helping people as a nurse, but
           | not at the cost of his own physical and mental health, having
           | to work 60-80 hours/week. If he ever gets back into it, he
           | would establish at the interview phase that he works 50
           | hours/week tops, and that vacation "requests" are not
           | requests, but notices.
        
             | landemva wrote:
             | That describes me, though in tech. Trying to step back in
             | to tech and recently had interview. After I explained
             | parenting time schedule, HR guy said everbody works 60 hour
             | weeks every week so there is not a role for me.
        
               | notch656a wrote:
               | That sounds perfectly fair actually. You explained you
               | can't work 60 hours a week and he explained it's not the
               | role for you. Complete honesty and the choice was made
               | not to do the deal. You shouldn't get special hours or
               | treatment for being a parent.
        
               | landemva wrote:
               | I agree with you, and I wanted them to know my needs so
               | we all succeed. Hilariously the guy never asked my pay
               | needs (low) and talked to me about the top of the pay
               | range. I didn't care to correct him since the expectation
               | was overtime all the time for everybody. Looks like a
               | management culture I don't want to struggle against, so I
               | can look elsewhere.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | Yeah the incredulous looks I get when I turn down gigs at
               | "unlimited" PTO positions are just wild.
               | 
               | Like what did you expect to happen? We're not stupid.
        
               | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
               | "Unlimited" gets a bad rap.
               | 
               | At the place I'm at right now, we have an unlimited
               | policy and I've got 25 days of PTO planned over the
               | course of the year that's all been approved.
               | 
               | But yeah...I do know not every place is that good about
               | it.
        
               | ikiris wrote:
               | Its just corpspeak for "we don't want to commit to you
               | getting time off or a possible slight payout"
        
           | taurath wrote:
           | A good friend of mine couldn't get a single 3 day weekend
           | approved (so one day of PTO) several months in advance.
           | 
           | Then I open my recruiter inbox and I see like 20 new B2C
           | healthcare startups.
           | 
           | It really feels like the entire economy is designed to
           | prevent problems being solved. Some people in healthcare are
           | making massive amounts of money and the quality of life of
           | everyone that performs the actual work has taken a nosedive
           | when it was already a really crappy situation.
        
           | 14 wrote:
           | From a Canadian stand point you American nurses are already
           | highly paid. My brother works in the US and was recently
           | thinking of coming back to work closer to where he grew up.
           | The best deal he could get here was $20usd less then what he
           | makes there. So on top of making $20 more then a nurse here
           | he is also making it in USD. He is making huge amounts of
           | cash as a nurse down there. How much more do nurses need?
        
             | gruez wrote:
             | >you American nurses are already highly paid. [...] How
             | much more do nurses need?
             | 
             | This seems perfectly consistent with econ101. Prices for
             | something is high, so we need more supply.
        
             | callmeal wrote:
             | >How much more do nurses need?
             | 
             | Something something freemarket no longer applies when it
             | comes to paying peons?
        
               | sophacles wrote:
               | > Something something freemarket no longer applies when
               | it comes to paying peons?
               | 
               | It never did.
        
               | conductr wrote:
               | The nursing labor market is so fluid, so much turnover,
               | it operates much more like a commodity exchange where
               | prices are concerned. This doesn't apply to people to
               | refuse to change employers so incentivizes short term
               | rate chasing
        
             | Melatonic wrote:
             | Apparently quite a bit if 90% hate their jobs
        
               | freeflight wrote:
               | Nursing, just like many other social oriented
               | professions, attract a lot of people for the right
               | reasons, like wanting to help other people, yet too often
               | that well-meaning motivation is then exploited to the
               | maximum by overworking and underpaying these people.
               | 
               | They will bear a lot of that, because these people care
               | for their patients and leaving a job because of bad
               | circumstances also means leaving their patients behind
               | _with_ those bad circumstances.
               | 
               | Which is not something that comes easy to everybody who
               | makes "helping others" such a big part of their work
               | motivation.
        
               | ethbr0 wrote:
               | It's the game developer of health care.
               | 
               | People get into it because they love it, and then have
               | their love exploited for profit by businesses
               | masquerading as social charities.
               | 
               | Some hospitals and clinics do great philanthropic work.
               | There are also a lot that don't, but have the same cross
               | over their door.
        
             | soared wrote:
             | Without starting values and locations (COL) you can't
             | compare values in this way.
        
               | tenpies wrote:
               | Canada is generally more expensive and taxes more
               | (especially when you factor in sales taxes and such).
               | 
               | To be honest, I am amazed that Canada has a healthcare
               | system left.
               | 
               | Decades of mismanagement and underinvestment aside,
               | almost any Canadian healthcare worker can cross the
               | border and instantly see a substantial pay bump and
               | increase in QoL.
               | 
               | I do imagine within the next 20 years, Canadian
               | healthcare is going to look vastly different. Like
               | something from an emerging market, where sure there is
               | universal healthcare, but you generally avoid it if you
               | have the means.
        
               | GoodJokes wrote:
        
             | psychlops wrote:
             | They use the extra money here to pay for healthcare.
        
             | cogman10 wrote:
             | > How much more do nurses need?
             | 
             | What you need to realize is that nursing salaries in the US
             | are NOT uniform. From what I've seen in past discussions
             | about it is they range anywhere from $20/hr -> $100k/year.
             | The $100k/year are usually achieved only in cities and
             | generally only by travel nurses.
             | 
             | The majority of nurses, that I've seen, are clocking in at
             | 50->60k yearly salary.
             | 
             | Sort of like saying "Oh, that google dev makes $300k a
             | year. How much more do devs in the US need?"
        
               | ethbr0 wrote:
               | "Nurse" is a pretty broad title when popularly thrown
               | about, given that it spans from LPN to DNP and med-
               | surg/clinic to ICU.
               | 
               | "Sysadmin" seems the most readily comparable title in IT,
               | going from "I push software to Windows PCs" to "I manage
               | supercomputer clusters."
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | BeetleB wrote:
               | > The $100k/year are usually achieved only in cities and
               | generally only by travel nurses.
               | 
               | While $100K/year is not the norm throughout the country,
               | it is normal in my city (non-SV). Travel nurses made a
               | _lot_ more during COVID.
               | 
               | From my conversations, pay is not the reason they are
               | considering leaving. Working conditions are.
        
               | 14 wrote:
               | He was an icu nurse not a travelling nurse and not in a
               | big city. Washington state I forget the city but it
               | wasn't a big city like Seattle.
        
               | redwall_hp wrote:
               | > Sort of like saying "Oh, that google dev makes $300k a
               | year. How much more do devs in the US need?"
               | 
               | And the answer to that is "how much is Google worth?" If
               | your business relies on the efforts of software engineers
               | to design and build your primary products, they should
               | have the primary equity in the company. So no, even
               | Google developers aren't paid nearly enough...and they're
               | certainly overworked, regardless of how much they make.
        
               | davidgay wrote:
               | https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Highest-paying-jobs-
               | in-S... reports Registered Nurses as getting $150k/year
               | in San Francisco, and $83k nationally.
        
             | bratwurst3000 wrote:
             | here in germany nurses make 15EUR And in switzerland nearly
             | the double. I can understand their frustration and those
             | who can leave or get new jobs.
        
               | MomoXenosaga wrote:
               | They are looking into getting nurses from the Philippines
               | and Africa. Works for the UK maybe but there's a huge
               | language barrier for the rest of Europe.
               | 
               | Besides they need their health workers too.
        
               | cogman10 wrote:
               | Something that should always be considered is US
               | healthcare is an expensive nightmare. Public healthcare
               | is a HUGE benefit that I think a lot of outside of US
               | people underestimate. (And no, nurses don't get free
               | healthcare from their hospitals. They have the same
               | terrible insurance everyone else gets).
               | 
               | For example, I have to pay $9000 a year BEFORE my
               | insurance starts covering healthcare costs. (at $5000 my
               | insurance starts paying out and I owe 10% of the bill).
               | My insurance does not cover medicine costs at all.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | In Germany's defense, at least, Switzerland has some of
               | the most insane wages in the world, and the cost of
               | living there is equally high.
        
           | noTooMooch wrote:
        
           | boringg wrote:
           | Executive hospital pay is ridiculous AND the executives are
           | often times just some MBA type without any real value add.
           | How about you chop up their comp between the nurses - would
           | be a start. Nurses are the lifeblood of the hospitals for
           | anyone who has had the unfortunate circumstances of having to
           | spend any time there.
        
         | AussieWog93 wrote:
         | >1. Many new nurses make the same or more and long time nurses.
         | It's frustrating when the nurse in charge with the most
         | experience is making less than new nurses. Some hospitals are
         | even trying to stop nurses from talking about pay.
         | 
         | I think non-performance-based pay is something endemic to many
         | female-dominated professions. My wife used to work in
         | childcare, and it did her head in that she was paid less than
         | complete idiots who'd been working there longer than she had.
        
       | hadlock wrote:
       | Not only are nurses talking about leaving the industry, in the
       | "newbie programmer" groups I help mentor in, there is an alarming
       | number of people who were _considering_ going in to health care
       | /nursing, who are now seriously reconsidering their options, or
       | changing majors in college mid-way through to move into
       | technology/programming.
       | 
       | I guess my point is, not only is the current healthcare labor
       | market at stake, but hiring/pay/working conditions now are having
       | upstream impacts on the labor pipeline of people coming into the
       | market, or evaluating entering healthcare. Having recently gone
       | to the ER with my toddler, I can tell you this is not an area you
       | want the market going for lowest bidder when you do have to use
       | healthcare services.
        
       | dukeofdoom wrote:
       | I have a nurse friend that was fired because she did not want to
       | take the vaccine. She had covid before, and strongly believes in
       | bodily autonomy. She did not want to be forced to put something
       | in her body against her will. She's started a business cleaning
       | houses now, and says is making same money. Except now she isn't
       | pressured to be rushing from patient to patient like crazy. She's
       | choosing her hours, works during the day at her pace and doesn't
       | bring home the emotional stress of dying people. She worked as a
       | nurse for 7 years and in that time she had thousands of patients.
       | She said in all that time she only discharged 3 patients after
       | chemo therapy. She's kind of convinced both are billion dollar
       | scams by medical industry.
        
       | LatteLazy wrote:
       | You see these numbers come out of nursing and teaching regularly.
       | But they both have very high retention rates. Because in both
       | cases, people stay because they would feel bad if they left.
       | They're not there for the money. This is why they're so badly
       | paid. This is why I didn't go into teaching: you cannot compete
       | with people who will work for emotional rewards instead of cash.
        
       | pkaye wrote:
       | A couple changes I've heard from nurses would be helpful:
       | 
       | 1. Safe mandated staffing ratios. California is one that does
       | this and many nurses seem happy with the ratios.
       | 
       | 2. Safe harbor laws. If the nurse feels they are pushed into a
       | risky situation, they should have a right to notify management
       | which will take on liability if they do not resolve it. A few
       | states have this but hospitals bully nurses not to invoking it.
       | 
       | 3. Better pay for the liability they take. Unlike management,
       | they could go to prison for mistakes they make. There was a
       | recent case nurses were outraged about.
       | 
       | 4. Unions are beneficial. In California the nurses union is
       | pretty strong to negotiate better terms and conditions.
        
       | xyzzy123 wrote:
       | Canberra flagged, Tasmania exempted, Sydney and Melbourne
       | upvoted.
        
       | honkycat wrote:
       | Greed is destabilizing society everywhere you look.
       | 
       | 1. Hire more nurses to spread the load around
       | 
       | 2. Pay existing nurses more
       | 
       | 3. Incentivize people to get the technical training required to
       | become a nurse.
       | 
       | "But what about my boss's 4th home?" I know. I am worried about
       | that too. i pay 1500/mo to live there, and the costs will
       | probably trickle down to me. we will have to figure something
       | out.
       | 
       | "But we don't have the money! Who is going to pay for it?" Well.
       | Then I guess the goose is cooked. We no longer have the resources
       | to run a functioning society. I want you to think about that, and
       | maybe think if we could get the funding from somewhere.
       | 
       | We are out of trained workers. The money diet our overlords put
       | us on has officially starved us. Welcome to the 3rd world. Hope
       | you saved up enough money for a ticket to Elysium.
       | 
       | Nobody wants to take out student loan debt anymore. If you are
       | over 30, let me fill you in: cost of college has gotten even more
       | insane than when we were in school.
       | 
       | we are seeing the same thing in our courts. Everyone is mad at
       | the PDX DA for turning people loose all the time, but the secret
       | is: there are not enough public defenders, and we can't hold
       | people indefinitely without cause. There are literally not enough
       | lawyers graduating from law school/graduated in the past to fill
       | these spots.
       | 
       | Our society is falling apart and all anyone can talk about is how
       | lazy the homeless are and obsess over what genitals people are
       | born with.
        
         | fallingfrog wrote:
         | "Well. Then I guess the goose is cooked. We no longer have the
         | resources to run a functioning society. I want you to think
         | about that, and maybe think if we could get the funding from
         | somewhere."
         | 
         | Absolutely! Thanks, this made me laugh out loud. It's almost as
         | if the people in charge of society don't have the same
         | interests as the rest of us..
        
       | dcchambers wrote:
       | The burnout in healthcare is unreal and is a problem we should
       | all be worried about.
        
       | tedmcory77 wrote:
       | My partner works in the healthcare industry; the Radonda Vaught
       | ruling and outcomes are going to echo through that industry in a
       | very significant way.
        
       | qclibre22 wrote:
       | These "nursing crisis" articles are a semi-annual feature, likely
       | a PR stunt by the hospitals for more subsidies and guest nurses.
       | 
       | The nursing crisis is 57 years old now:
       | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14252064/ (1965)
       | 
       | Similar articles                   WHY THE NURSING SHORTAGE
       | PERSISTS.         HALE T. N Engl J Med. 1964 May 21;270:1092-7.
       | doi: 10.1056/NEJM196405212702105. PMID: 14121489 No abstract
       | available.                  STUDENTS' DISAPPOINTMENTS IN PUBLIC
       | HEALTH NURSING.         HANSEN AC, THOMAS DB. Nurs Outlook. 1965
       | May;13:68-72. PMID: 14291737 No abstract available.
        
         | chillingeffect wrote:
         | A good path to explore, but requires more data points than two
         | from 60 years ago... Let's try this approach: [0] steady with
         | huge uptick since the pandemic [1] steady decline with uptick
         | in July 2021 [2] sparse, but slow incline since July 2021 [3]
         | shallow dip ~2013, slow include since
         | 
         | [0]
         | https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=n...
         | [1]
         | https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=n...
         | [2]
         | https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=n...
         | [3]
         | https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=n...
        
       | gjsman-1000 wrote:
       | A family friend was talking to a doctor who was considering
       | quitting.
       | 
       | The reason why, at least for that doctor, wasn't really the
       | stress from patients. It was all the damned paperwork and the
       | stress that created.
        
         | pavon wrote:
         | Agreed. This article is so off the mark, trying to talk all the
         | ways technology can help this problem without a single sentence
         | retrospecting about any of the problems that shitty EMRs have
         | caused or at least facilitated. The massive increase in
         | charting, and the fact that nurses spend more time on CYA than
         | providing care these days is the number one reason I've heard
         | from nurses who are trying to get out. High patient-to-staff
         | ratios is the second, which wouldn't be quite as bad if it
         | weren't for all the charting.
        
         | christophilus wrote:
         | I've known a few nurses, doctors, and PTs who expressed exactly
         | this sentiment. It's such a stupid problem, too. There's no
         | reason they should have such an onerous burden, and yet they
         | all do.
         | 
         | One of the PTs I know spent at least as much time filling out
         | paperwork as he did with patients. This was partly due to the
         | volume of paperwork required by govt / insurance / lawyers /
         | whatever, and partly due to absolutely awful software.
        
           | treeman79 wrote:
           | I got badly injured. Everyone refused to do paperwork. Every
           | doctor said it was every others job. I had great disability
           | coverage. (In theory)
           | 
           | Result. Spent 2 years trying to work when I couldn't get out
           | of bed and was mostly blind.
           | 
           | All because doctors didn't want to spend 20 minutes filling
           | out forms. Plus Disability companies lie constantly until
           | various deadlines pass.
        
             | gbear605 wrote:
             | Obviously the doctors should have done the paperwork and
             | you shouldn't have had to deal with that. But it seems like
             | the root cause isn't that doctors don't want to do
             | paperwork, it's that the insurance is introducing too much
             | paperwork.
        
         | bkjelden wrote:
         | My partner is an NP, not only is there an astounding amount of
         | paperwork, usually it's done outside of working hours because
         | management took the chunks of the work day that were previously
         | blocked off for doing paperwork and turned them into more
         | patient visits so they could make more money.
        
         | henchore wrote:
         | During my last physical, the doctor was trying to listen to my
         | symptoms while getting frantically pinged from the hospital or
         | something. I don't blame him at all, but this trend of always-
         | on + interruptions at work is disastrous, I imagine especially
         | so for people like doctors doing extremely high level
         | intellectual work.
        
         | nittanymount wrote:
         | this is more correct, the medical fields have to do a lot of
         | paperwork to follow rules and avoid issues (legal?) almost half
         | of their time are on charting instead of taking care of
         | patients, paperwork is needed, but in most facilities, it takes
         | too much time, and the workflows are not optimized enough as
         | well...
        
           | hateful wrote:
           | I've always wondered why they don't hire an assistant that
           | JUST does the paperwork/coding for the doctor. They could
           | follow them into room and just take notes (and leave at times
           | when it is appropriate).
           | 
           | How much could it cost to pay someone else to do this? Surely
           | less than a doctor makes doing it... It can become its own
           | profession. It's a separate skill - separate from what a
           | doctor should be focusing on.
           | 
           | On a side note, it seems that a lot of professions would
           | benefit from having an assistant - a thing that seems to have
           | disappeared - if what I've seen in old movies in shows is to
           | be believed. Another side-case of this is the fact that
           | technical people tend to be promoted into management roles
           | and have to deal with attendance and time-sheets - why not
           | have someone else do it? The work only suffers.
        
             | pomian wrote:
             | Brilliant suggestion. Some of us still remember the days
             | when we were paid to be creative engineers, solid creative
             | engineers, designing elegant solutions. Didn't know or need
             | to know how to type, design layout of reports, kerning and
             | fonts, didn't keep track of bills and accounts: Just
             | engineering. (Of course report presentation, review and
             | editing were still necessary, not not the actual technical
             | aspects.)
        
             | opwieurposiu wrote:
             | My kid's pediatrician has a guy that does this. The job
             | title was "Scribe." A little bit crowded in the exam room
             | but you get used to it.
             | 
             | The Scribe had a laptop and could look up whatever info was
             | needed while the doc was doing his thing. If a scrip is
             | needed the scribe types it in to the system and then the
             | doc had to read it and approve.
             | 
             | Just keeping the docs hands clean from not having to touch
             | a dirty laptop/iPad all the time has a health benefit I
             | bet.
        
         | hateful wrote:
         | My wife is a PA - here are a few things we've (anecdotally)
         | noticed:
         | 
         | 1. A few doctors left practices after they got taken over by a
         | bigger entity and the hoops they had to jump trough weren't
         | worth it, so they retired.
         | 
         | 2. The insurance companies - they control EVERYTHING. One thing
         | that happens a lot is that they don't allow her to order an MRI
         | unless she orders an X-Ray first - even if what they're testing
         | for wouldn't show up on an X-Ray. And this slows down the
         | process of diagnosis by days. There are more examples of things
         | like this - things that should be up to the provider, but end
         | up being up to the insurance company (what drug to prescribe or
         | what treatment to pursue first) - it makes no sense (at least
         | from what I hear from her).
        
         | gadflyinyoureye wrote:
         | The software in this space is terrible. The system is designed
         | for admins not practitioners. For example blood pressure entry
         | is odd with two boxes. Note capture is slow due to needing it
         | be typed rather than written. Sharing out of the core system is
         | onerous.
         | 
         | FHIR would be a good idea, but in practice its hard to
         | correlate a patient across the systems. Few hospitals and
         | doctors setup a push notification for when they change a
         | patient's record.
         | 
         | Essentially all of the software needs to be redone with a focus
         | on a centralized record tracking system. The rewrite needs
         | practitioners (all of them, not just Docs, but the lowly CNA
         | too) to drive the requirements. Admins should be included, but
         | not the target of day to day UI.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | BouffantJoe wrote:
         | I've heard a lot of the same from teachers.
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | My primary care doctor dropped me a few years back. He said his
         | solo practice couldn't handle the paperwork of having so many
         | patients so he went to just seeing patients for his specialty.
         | 
         | He was admittedly older and had never particularly embraced
         | computers and so forth.
         | 
         | (And then my new PCP retired during the pandemic.)
        
           | dt3ft wrote:
           | Isn't there any software for solo practices out there?
        
             | JshWright wrote:
             | Obvious bias, since I work there, but Elation Health is
             | very focused on building EHR software that makes it
             | possible for independent primary care providers to be
             | successful and not have to spend hours per day doing
             | paperwork.
             | 
             | https://www.elationhealth.com/
             | 
             | Speaking from personal experience, moonlighting as a
             | paramedic, paperwork is a universal challenge in healthcare
             | (I often spend more time documenting a call than the call
             | itself took from patient contact to transfer of care to the
             | ER). It is shockingly rare for EHRs (regardless of the
             | speciality they focus on) to actively try to make life
             | better for the clinician. That's a large part of why I'm at
             | Elation for my day job; the founders (and therefore the
             | whole company) have a ton of empathy for the doctors (and
             | staff) we serve.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | He was part of a hospital system so he used their software.
             | I know nothing about medical software but my impression is
             | that there is a huge amount of paperwork regardless
             | involving insurance, prescriptions, testing, etc. Stuff is
             | more integrated and electronic than it used to be but
             | there's still a lot of manual interactions, phone calls,
             | faxes, etc.
        
           | pavon wrote:
           | In the 20 years since I've graduated college, the longest
           | I've had the same PCP is 3 years, about half of the remainder
           | I had for 2 years, and the rest I only saw once before they
           | left and I had to change again. Even if they do stay, they
           | have to see so many patients (~1000 per PCP is what I've
           | heard) that they won't remember anything about me, and will
           | be no better at treating me than a doctor pulled at random.
           | 
           | For people with chronic conditions a PCP makes sense, for the
           | rest of us it is just another pointless loop you have to jump
           | through.
        
           | mistrial9 wrote:
           | almost every single general/primary care Medical Doctor's
           | office in this area of California closed doors after the year
           | 2000 or so.. Paperwork related to insurance billing, and
           | inability to compete with Big Managed Care (Kaiser Health)
           | for work conditions and benefits, is what I heard as
           | reasons.. the offices were empty commercial space, it was
           | noticeable how many there were...
        
       | crawfordcomeaux wrote:
       | I'm so excited about the idea of creating an anarchic healing
       | network of former medical industry workers looking to create a
       | new system oriented toward meeting all the needs, not just some &
       | also not for profit.
        
       | next_xibalba wrote:
       | Sometimes the only way to recognize and solve problems is to go
       | through a crisis. I hope all of these nurses quit and the rest of
       | us wise up to how important they are.
       | 
       | (I have a nurse in my family)
        
       | dijonman2 wrote:
       | Maybe we shouldn't have fired a bunch of them.
        
       | kxyvr wrote:
       | My wife is an ICU physician, so I've been watching this from the
       | sidelines. I can't emphasize enough on how badly COVID broke the
       | system. There's always been problem with staffing and burnout.
       | However, COVID really brought out the worst in people. The
       | patient population became far more abusive than it had in the
       | past and this was during a period where all healthcare providers
       | were working extremely hard, not seeing their families, and
       | sacrificing their personal health to help people. Then, a large
       | part of society decided that COVID wasn't an issue, refused to
       | mask, and refused to vaccinate. At some point, a large portion of
       | providers decided enough was enough and quit:
       | 
       | https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/workforce/if-1-in-5-he...
       | 
       | Now, the problem is that when people started quitting, there were
       | fewer nurses to take care of the patients and their ratios went
       | up. During normal times, a floor nurse might be 6-8 patients to
       | one nurse, a step down unit might be 4-1, and an ICU might be 1-1
       | or 1-2. It depends on the level of care required. Now, they're
       | doing more than double this on a regular basis. And, frankly,
       | they can't do it, at least safely. There's a number that a nurse
       | can call if they believe they have an unsafe number of patients
       | in order to get some kind of legal protection, but they still
       | have to see that number of patients. And, frankly, it's
       | incredibly stressful because they really, truly can't take care
       | of that many patients, so they quit. A friend of my wife is a
       | nurse trainer at a large hospital. They're having 80% of new
       | nurses quit during their onboarding process because the ratios
       | are absurd. A good portion of my wife's time is spent figuring
       | out who's the least sick patient to discharge from the ICU
       | because they don't have the staff.
       | 
       | Unfortunately, I don't think we're even close for this to being
       | over either. The constant refrain is that COVID is the new normal
       | and we need to adjust. I would contend that a new normal would
       | imply a stable operating point and I do not believe this to be
       | the case. It's going to take a really long time to restaff
       | appropriately where the patient ratios and stress level
       | manageable. Long time means years because, really, hospitals want
       | and need BSNs and not just associates level training. In the mean
       | time, every time we have a COVID surge, the hospital gets
       | flooded, everyone gets overworked and abused, and more people
       | quit.
        
       | tomohawk wrote:
       | What I've seen: health insurance companies and large medical
       | companies were able to get everything they wanted. The result was
       | Obamacare. It's been down hill from there.
       | 
       | I have family members in medicine, and they see the same thing.
       | There was a really good opportunity at that time to address some
       | glaring issues with healthcare, and we ended up with this thing
       | that did not address those issues and created a lot more issues.
        
       | Kharvok wrote:
       | Hospital consolidation into major for-profit networks is largely
       | to blame
        
       | mikewarot wrote:
       | This is the direct and extremely unalterable consequence of one
       | decision, to base our medical system on profit, instead of
       | results, or capabilities. We've left a matter of national
       | security in the hands of accountants.
       | 
       | The tragic insertion of a middle layer, the insurance industry
       | (AKA Death Panels), makes it even more tragic and inefficient.
       | 
       | You can not seek profits in a competitive environment without
       | reducing every cost to the bare minimum. Until recently, it
       | happened slowly, but the public health emergency is a forcing
       | function that will not be ignored.
       | 
       | This wave of resignations will be replicated in teaching, by the
       | way.
        
       | sumanmd wrote:
       | Being a physician, Since IT came, it has alleviated some problems
       | but has unleashed a monster which tend to cause lot more data
       | driven to documentation to burnout. Every physician in United
       | States currently experiences some kind of burn out. Nurses on the
       | other hand experience much worse, 12-14 hrs shifts of constant
       | stress. Overall health system in US is broken just as the
       | insurance system. People will leave jobs when there is no
       | satisfaction and just burn out.
       | 
       | In my opinion nurse should have shorter 8 hrs shifts and 4 per
       | week . In this capitalistic driven health care system, where
       | being a patient and health care provider comes with a cost.
        
       | indymike wrote:
       | As a patient I dread interacting with healthcare... but I can
       | only imagine how horrible it would be to be on the clinical staff
       | where you are wedged between people needing care and 52 bosses
       | trying to minimize risk, maximize billing, and reduce expenses.
        
       | monkpit wrote:
       | The survey sample was 200 RNs in the USA.
        
         | PheonixPharts wrote:
         | Standard error in this case, assuming the 200 are randomly
         | sampled is:
         | 
         | sqrt((p*(1-p)/n)
         | 
         | sqrt((0.9*0.1)/200) = 0.021
         | 
         | So 95% confidence interval for this ~ 0.86 - 0.94
         | 
         | Does that radically change the message of this article?
        
           | tqi wrote:
           | That also assumes there is no response bias. The linked
           | article doesn't seem to go too deep on methods but the source
           | is a content marketing piece for Hospital IQ, so I'd take it
           | with a grain of salt.
        
             | jonshariat wrote:
             | Also my first thought when I saw n was 200, lots of surveys
             | make mistakes in sample selection or question writing but
             | it seems with the responses here and my own observations
             | being close to nursing, the main point checks out. Lots of
             | burn out and leaving the profession.
        
               | tqi wrote:
               | Agree, I'm definitely not making any statements as to
               | whether or not the burnout is real. I just think that a
               | lot times the assumptions we make when we apply
               | statistical concepts (like standard error) to real world
               | data don't hold up.
        
           | monkpit wrote:
           | It's good information to have in the comments, I was not
           | making any judgement.
        
           | seaman1921 wrote:
           | lol.. what kind of calculation is this? n is 1 in this case,
           | the survey was not repeated 200 times from which you derived
           | 90% as the mean number of nurses quitting.
        
             | PheonixPharts wrote:
             | It's a normal approximation of the expected variance (in
             | terms of standard deviation) in the estimate of the mean of
             | the sum of 200 Bernoulli random variables. Each nurses'
             | response is considered an observation of a Bernoulli
             | distributed random variable, and we trying to determine the
             | rate of that variable.
             | 
             | You are incorrect that "n is 1" since, by that logic one
             | survey talking to 100,000 nurses would be the same as one
             | talking to 3.
             | 
             | If you would like an alternate, more Bayesian formulation
             | we can use the Beta distribution which is parameterized by
             | alpha (numbers of 'yes') and beta (number of 'no').
             | 
             | This approach is a bit more intuitive than the Frequentist
             | method since it answers the question "what do we believe to
             | be the expected rate of nurses answering 'yes'"
             | 
             | In this case alpha=180 and beta=20, we'll include uniform
             | prior of alpha_prior = 1, and beta_prior = 1
             | 
             | For Betas the posterior is defined quite nicely as:
             | 
             | Beta(alpha_posterior, beta_posterior) =
             | Beta(alpha_likelihood + alpha_prior, beta_likelihood +
             | beta_prior)
             | 
             | In general for Beta distributions we can compute the
             | expectation as:
             | 
             | E[Beta(alpha,beta)] = alpha/(alpha + beta)
             | 
             | In this case: 181/202 = ~0.9
             | 
             | And the variance of a Beta distributed random variable is:
             | 
             | Var[Beta(alpha, beta)] = (alpha*beta)/((alpha+beta)^2 *
             | (alpha + beta + 1))
             | 
             | Which for our case is:
             | 
             | 0.00046
             | 
             | and the standard deviation of this is just it's square
             | root:
             | 
             | 0.021
             | 
             | Which gives us the same answer as we get with the normal
             | approximation.
        
               | seaman1921 wrote:
               | Thank you for taking the time to explain your modelling.
               | Unfortunately I will need to read more on this topic,
               | because I do not understand the intuition behind the
               | priors "uniform prior of alpha_prior = 1, and beta_prior
               | = 1".
               | 
               | The way I would generally approach such a problem is by
               | running monte carlo simulations. Assuming the true rate
               | of nurses quitting is X, what is the chance that a random
               | sample of 200 nurses has the expectation of quitting >=
               | 90%. To get the lower bound of the confidence interval, I
               | will run this simulation for several values of X,
               | starting at say X=60%, increasing until I get >95% chance
               | that a random sample of 200 nurses has E(quitting) > 90%.
               | Do you think this approach makes sense ?
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | PheonixPharts wrote:
               | Simulations are fantastic, and often necessary for tricky
               | statistics problems, however what you are describing is
               | reinventing so much of the wheel using simulation that
               | you are going to be spending multiple orders of magnitude
               | extra computation to get an approximately correct
               | solution. You also do have some conceptual errors in your
               | plan.
               | 
               | For example
               | 
               | > Assuming the true rate of nurses quitting is X, what is
               | the chance that a random sample of 200 nurses has the
               | expectation of quitting >= 90%.
               | 
               | You have just described the Binomial distribution [0],
               | which is probably the most elementary distribution you
               | learn about when studying probability and statistics
               | (even the Bernoulli is just a special case of it).
               | There's no need to run simulations to answer this
               | particular question.
               | 
               | There are also some fundamental misunderstandings with
               | your approach:
               | 
               | > increasing until I get >95% chance that a random sample
               | of 200 nurses has E(quitting) > 90%.
               | 
               | The probability of getting > 90% 'yes/quitting' (i.e.
               | more than 180) if the true probability 'yes' is in fact
               | 0.9 is only 0.46. You won't cross your threshold of 95%
               | here until you reach X=0.933
               | 
               | If you wanted to construct the 95% CI from pure
               | simulation, a better approach would be to sample 200
               | observations from a 0.9 Bernoulli random variable (just
               | sample from a uniform, and check if it's less than 0.9),
               | compute the mean of the samples, and repeat this 10,000
               | or so times. Then look at the empirical CDF [1] (fairly
               | easy to implement in code) and look at the lower 2.5% and
               | upper 2.5% values and you have your bounds (which will be
               | the same as the ones I posted within some epsilon).
               | 
               | I do recommend, if you're seriously interested in
               | understanding this, picking up a basic probability/stats
               | book and work your way through it.
               | 
               | 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution 1.
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_distribution_func
               | tio...
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | spywaregorilla wrote:
         | That's plenty so long as the sample is random
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | vmception wrote:
         | And for just one year with no information on what they would
         | have said in other years.
         | 
         | "I plan on quitting my job if I had money" wow stop the
         | presses.
        
         | degenerate wrote:
         | I wish there was some law requiring surveying companies to
         | fully disclose their method of contact and compensation. I can
         | absolutely see an employee looking to leave their job being
         | more receptive to taking a survey. Those happy with their jobs
         | are not as likely to respond to third-party entities like "
         | _Hospital IQ_ " contacting them. Maybe the survey company
         | masked this survey as a "pre-screen" to finding new jobs! We
         | will never know. The process of recruiting survey participants
         | has GREAT implications on the results.
        
           | mikkergp wrote:
           | Nursing is a underappricated underpaid job, but we can't get
           | 90% of people in this world to agree that the sky is blue.
        
       | bitcurious wrote:
       | A lot of the work nurses and doctors have had to do over the past
       | few years has been truly soul crushing. Imagine getting a patient
       | you know is likely to die and telling them that no, they can't
       | die at home. No, they can't see their family. No, they can't opt
       | out of the then. For certain groups of patients, the work of
       | nurses has turned into death row prison wardens, because there is
       | a 10% chance they might be saved, and for a while there was no
       | way to opt out of that.
       | 
       | Second hand impression from a doctor friend.
        
       | badtoro wrote:
       | I am sure that the policy that forced nurses with natural
       | immunity to be vaccinated or lose their job has nothing to do
       | with.
        
       | eksx wrote:
       | I work in tech with no college degree and about 9 years of
       | programming experience. I make mid 100,000's per year. My S/O has
       | 6 years of Emergency Department experience and a bachelors degree
       | and she made about 65k at our local hospital. I think pay is an
       | enormous factor in this. Her local hospital has nurses with less
       | than 1 year of experience being preceptors to new grads.
        
         | giarc wrote:
         | She should apply for tele medicine. I knew a few nurses that
         | took this on during the pandemic and were making about
         | $50-60/hr from home. I suspect there are fewer opportunities
         | like this now, but it's worth a shot.
        
         | notch656a wrote:
         | How long did it take you to break 100k? Be sure to include
         | those pre-employed years when you didn't even know what 'if'
         | statement meant. A nurse can hit that in 6 years easy through
         | BSN+NP, and that's starting at literally NOTHING.
         | (Alternatively there's a like path for PAs to practice in a
         | mid-level practitioner role that is comparable to NP in those
         | same 6 years)
        
           | eksx wrote:
           | I spent a bit of time making basic webpages throughout
           | middle/high school using front page. I didn't start taking
           | programming seriously until about early 2013. It took me
           | until about 2019 to hit 100k salary. My girlfriend has 4
           | years of schooling and 6 years of experience as a nurse. So i
           | guess she has even more total experience than I do.
        
           | DontMindit wrote:
           | Anyone can become a nurse. It doesint take exceptional talent
           | or brains. Programming does though. A nurse can't beat a
           | programmer for salary, they're in different leagues
        
         | narcindin wrote:
         | When you say "mid 100,000's" do you mean ~150k or ~500K?
        
           | jjcon wrote:
           | I would interpret that as 130k-170k
        
             | eksx wrote:
             | Correct! Thanks for clarifying!
        
           | eksx wrote:
           | Sorry, meant ~150k!
        
       | germinalphrase wrote:
       | I have a close relation that works for one of the oldest
       | pediatric hospitals in the country. It was recently revealed that
       | they will be shuttering almost all pediatric services in the next
       | year because they can 10x their profits by only serving elderly
       | clients. The _entire purpose_ of this organization was to provide
       | pediatric healthcare, and it wasn't losing money...
       | 
       | Sometimes, it feels like we're min-maxing ourselves to death over
       | here.
        
         | dontbeevil1992 wrote:
         | capitalism
        
           | ren_engineer wrote:
           | capitalism is the reason for hospitals choosing to serve
           | patients covered by Medicare which will give them a blank
           | check with tax payer money?
        
             | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
             | > Medicare which will give them a blank check with tax
             | payer money?
             | 
             | Whoever implanted this idea into your head was lying to you
             | and you should probably question the other claims that
             | person or organization has said.
        
             | gen220 wrote:
             | Medicare is not a blank check. It's a standard check (see
             | sibling comment on fee schedules), and each check tends to
             | actually be quite low of an amount.
             | 
             | The magnitude of "standard" and "low" are both demonstrated
             | by the fact that when private insurers negotiate pricing
             | contracts (basically, a one-off fee schedule) with hospital
             | groups, they express prices in terms of "medicare
             | multiples".
             | 
             | For example, the insurer will pay up to 13x of what
             | Medicare pays for an fMRI administered under non-emergent
             | circumstances with medically-justifiable cause. Pretty much
             | every multiple is >1x, many are far more than 10x.
             | 
             | And medicare is arguably more expensive to provide, since
             | the probability of confounding issues from disability or
             | age is higher than in the general insured population.
             | 
             | Medicare is very consistent with paying, especially in
             | comparison to private insurance, but the a la carte fees
             | are quite "low" by relatively-freer-market definitions (I
             | say relatively, because the reality is that private
             | insurers negotiating with hospital groups is the antithesis
             | of a free market, in most conceivable dimensions).
             | 
             | ---
             | 
             | The main reason medical groups lobby against "medicare for
             | all" is that they will lose lucrative "20xM" payouts from
             | private insurers, and it's difficult to see how their
             | ballooning administrative costs can survive on such a lean
             | diet.
             | 
             | Of course, this line of thinking is deliberately ignorant
             | of the thought that medicare fee schedules can be
             | renegotiated to reflect the population of patients
             | "medicare for all" would incorporate. But nobody's
             | interested in thinking two turns ahead, let alone advancing
             | the game state, when their pockets are nicely-lined on turn
             | zero.
        
             | thedataslinger wrote:
             | It's not because Medicare offers a "blank check"; after all
             | --the amount of revenue that the hospital can generate will
             | always be hard-capped by the number of
             | beds+/physicians+/resources available.
             | 
             | They go with Medicare because the pay-out rate (i.e.
             | "collect-ability") for billable services is much higher--
             | and much more predictable--than if they attempted to
             | collect/negotiate with non-governmental providers. A LOT of
             | money is lost by hospital systems due to unpaid patient
             | responsibility (e.g. insurance deductibles), which they can
             | minimize by offering only services already guaranteed to be
             | covered by Medicare.
        
             | Clubber wrote:
             | >Medicare ... will give them a blank check with tax payer
             | money?
             | 
             | Whoever gave you that idea, you should stop listening to
             | them.
             | 
             | Medicare payments are subject to a medicare fee schedule,
             | which is typically much lower than a traditional private
             | enterprise's fee schedule. What that means is medicare gets
             | billed a lot less than a regular patient with insurance.
             | 
             | https://www.kff.org/medicare/issue-brief/how-much-more-
             | than-...                 "Private insurers paid nearly
             | double Medicare rates for all hospital services (199% of
             | Medicare rates, on average), ranging from 141% to 259% of
             | Medicare rates across the reviewed studies."
             | "The difference between private and Medicare rates was
             | greater for outpatient than inpatient hospital services,
             | which averaged 264% and 189% of Medicare rates overall,
             | respectively."            "For physician services, private
             | insurance paid 143% of Medicare rates, on average, ranging
             | from 118% to 179% of Medicare rates across studies."
        
           | LewisVerstappen wrote:
           | The healthcare system in the US clearly has nothing to do
           | with free markets considering how unbelievably opaque and
           | regulated everything is.
        
             | cowpig wrote:
             | There's no such thing as a "free market" for healthcare.
             | The ability for consumers to exit a market is one of the
             | prerequisites for the invisible hand effect. You can't exit
             | the healthcare market.
        
               | nickff wrote:
               | You also can't exit the food market, or the shelter
               | market, or the clothing market, yet those seem to work
               | much better.
        
               | landryraccoon wrote:
               | Food, shelter and clothing generally have discoverable
               | pricing.
               | 
               | I challenge you to find the price of a cancer treatment
               | regime protocol in the United States. I will bet you any
               | amount of money you care to wager that no US provider
               | exists anywhere that will give you a price quote for lung
               | cancer treatment in writing anytime before that treatment
               | is provided.
               | 
               | And even IF you could, that only covers the cases where
               | you are still have enough health and mind to rationally
               | evaluate the prices. If you've been in a car accident and
               | are dragged unconscious and bleeding into the ER, you
               | can't shop around, even if they DID give you a price,
               | which they certainly won't until you're already treated.
        
               | nickff wrote:
               | I agree with your points, but I think there are narrower
               | solutions. With respect to pricing, the problem seems to
               | be the negotiations between hospitals and insurers, as
               | well as hospitals' failures to institute cost-accounting.
               | Forcing them to do better accounting, and have a clear
               | price-list would probably help, but getting rid of the
               | employer healthcare tax subsidy (or expanding it) would
               | likely be a better solution.
               | 
               | With respect to ER care, it does seem impossible to 'shop
               | around', but these cases make up a minority of healthcare
               | expenditures. Perhaps government should cover these cases
               | (though this could have horrible incentive problems), or
               | this type of insurance should be separated from the rest,
               | and somehow priced clearly and in advance (according to
               | level of care) by a cartel arrangement or state regulated
               | rates.
        
               | jewayne wrote:
               | > Forcing them to do better accounting, and have a clear
               | price-list would probably help, but getting rid of the
               | employer healthcare tax subsidy (or expanding it) would
               | likely be a better solution.
               | 
               | Believe it or not, it would be way easier politically to
               | implement Medicare For All than to do piecemeal reforms.
        
               | nickff wrote:
               | 'Medicare for all' will cause a number of foreseeable and
               | unforeseeable problems (and benefits). It would be
               | interesting to see one or more states do it, and observe
               | the results.
        
               | jewayne wrote:
               | I think the experience in Vermont suggests that it's
               | unlikely to ever happen at the state level. It's far more
               | likely to be a big bang at the national level.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | How can a state do universal single payer of its own
               | design when there are multiple direct federal health care
               | systems covering a substantial portion of the population,
               | plus a huge tranch of the money states rely on for health
               | care tied to a federal/state cooperative program with
               | federal programmatic and eligibility constraints?
        
               | marcusverus wrote:
               | You can't exit the food market, either, and yet there is
               | clearly a thriving free market for food. How does your
               | theory account for this?
        
               | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
               | This is a bad faith question asked without any basic
               | thought.
               | 
               | Within 5 miles, I have at least 10 different grocery
               | stores to shop at. Each will carry hundreds of products
               | at less than $10 each. Not only do I have tons of
               | choices, but the pricing is completely transparent. And
               | that's just grocery stores. Add restaurants (Both sit-
               | down restaurants and fast food), and that number quickly
               | reaches over 100 within a 5-mile radius.
               | 
               | If I'm in a medical emergency and someone dials 911, I'm
               | likely just being brought to the nearest hospital. I have
               | zero choice in the matter, and will come out with
               | whatever bill they want to charge me.
               | 
               | Even in non-emergencies, good luck shopping on price.
               | Doctor offices don't like giving that out.
               | 
               | There's competition in the food market, but not
               | healthcare.
        
               | jewayne wrote:
               | 45 million Americans are on the SNAP (food stamp)
               | program. Does your definition of "thriving free market"
               | account for this?
        
               | wcfields wrote:
               | I think you're being purposefully obtuse, but here's why:
               | 
               | - SNAP / EBT / Foodstamps for people making so little
               | money. Add onto that, Food banks.
               | 
               | - Farm subsidies for many cheap foodstuffs (Corn) causing
               | massive cheap, albeit junk food that can sustain.
               | 
               | - I can literally grow food in the ground for "free", put
               | it in mason jars and save my food for a year. I can't
               | open a fresh can of broken-arm at the fixed cost.
               | 
               | - Food is fungible, if I'm hungry, I can wait 2, 3, 8+
               | hours to eat, or have a quick snack until meal time. It's
               | not like I need a Big Mac infusion in the next 10 seconds
               | or else I'll die from lack of special sauce.
               | 
               | - You have many options of food. You can eat Soylent,
               | rice&beans, or steak for every meal at various price
               | points. You don't really get an ala carte when it comes
               | to Chemotherapy.
               | 
               | - You can always eat monkey pellets [1]
               | 
               | [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/moreplatesmoredates/comments
               | /qbfkfl...
        
               | asimilator wrote:
               | > I can literally grow food in the ground for "free", put
               | it in mason jars and save my food for a year.
               | 
               | This is true only in an extremely pedantic, unrealistic
               | kinda way. If it was easy/free everyone would be growing
               | all their own food.
        
               | germinalphrase wrote:
               | At least here in the Midwest, people grow food all the
               | time. Can't grow strawberries in December, of course -
               | but we eat up canned goods from friends/family throughout
               | the winter.
        
               | throwawayboise wrote:
               | Sure you can. You can decide that you are not going to
               | enrich an industry that basically does nothing for you in
               | the long run. Everyone ends up dead, and I for one do not
               | plan to spend my final years under constant care from a
               | industry that is designed to drain every last dollar I
               | have before I pass on.
        
               | jewayne wrote:
               | I think the majority of people say something to that
               | effect at some point in their life. But the only real
               | alternative is suicide of some kind, and how many people
               | actually follow through with suicide?
        
             | jerry1979 wrote:
             | That's probably why the commenter (blithely) said
             | "capitalism" which is the name of the economic system which
             | produced the health care system in the United States.
        
               | marcusverus wrote:
               | By that line of reasoning, capitalism produced Social
               | Security and communism is produced Alibaba.
        
               | marcusverus wrote:
               | By that line of reasoning, capitalism produced Social
               | Security and communism produced Alibaba.
        
               | whimsicalism wrote:
               | I don't think the US can be summed up with a single word.
               | 
               | Can I hire my friend who is a medical student to perform
               | surgery on me legally? No?
        
               | wcfields wrote:
               | > I don't think the US can be summed up with a single
               | word.
               | 
               | I think it can, I've been thinking about this and it's
               | "scam".
               | 
               | Like, think how often everything in our country is a
               | straight up scam. Healthcare, parking tickets, basically
               | anything you buy. It's almost all snake-oil flim-flam
               | every which way and as a 'consumer' you have to wade
               | through the mire every single day to get scammed as
               | little as possible.
        
               | yoyohello13 wrote:
               | So true! Everywhere I turn it's just people trying to
               | extract the maximum amount of money from me for the
               | minimum amount of value in return. It can't be good for
               | our psyche.
        
               | LewisVerstappen wrote:
               | Sure, but that's like blaming "humanity" for all the woes
               | of the health care system. It's humans who produced the
               | health care system in the US after all.
               | 
               | You have to be more precise as there are clearly aspects
               | of capitalism that have resulted in tremendous
               | improvements in quality of life (look at North Korea vs.
               | South Korea).
               | 
               | Regulatory capture is one of the issues & revolving door
               | politics. Especially a big problem in the healthcare &
               | finance industries (the current head of the SEC spent his
               | career at Goldman Sachs for ex.)
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | I don't even think Marx would agree with that. He thought
               | capitalism produced a stage of history that wasn't
               | exactly capitalist, which then would inevitably produce
               | communism through socialism.
        
               | frgtpsswrdlame wrote:
               | I doubt Marx could have thought of something more
               | capitalist than $THC or $HCA.
        
               | orwin wrote:
               | It is what he called late stage capitalism. He might have
               | been wrong on the solutions, but he nailed the problem
               | quite well.
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | He could have and did: factories and craftspeople from
               | Adam Smith's world are the epitypes of capitalist
               | activity. Giant corporations that half-merge with the
               | government are Marx's final, dying and barely capitalist
               | stage of capitalism, that hardly involves markets at all.
               | He thought capitalism (factories and craftspeople) would
               | reach the end of its lifespan and give birth to $THC or
               | $HCA.
        
             | callmeal wrote:
             | >The healthcare system in the US clearly has nothing to do
             | with free markets
             | 
             | Ahem. Regulatory capture would like a word.
        
               | dnissley wrote:
               | How has regulatory capture helped create the US
               | healthcare system?
        
             | yhoneycomb wrote:
             | Actually, that's exactly how unfettered "free market"
             | capitalism operates. The end game is big companies end up
             | controlling everything, including the regulations in order
             | to tip the scales in their favor.
        
               | LewisVerstappen wrote:
               | Regulatory capture is the issue that needs to be solved.
               | _Not_ free markets.
               | 
               | Free markets are the most efficient way for information
               | to be transferred throughout the system.
               | 
               | Stricter campaign finance laws, ending revolving-door
               | politics, etc.
               | 
               | But putting the blame on free markets seems like a
               | mistake.
        
               | frgtpsswrdlame wrote:
               | Feels a lot like 'Real free markets have never been
               | tried!' which we all know from its standard form on the
               | left. If, at this point in history, real free markets
               | have been unable to sustain themselves in the areas of
               | the economy that people depend on the most (healthcare as
               | a major example) then perhaps we ought to consider
               | whether they're able to sustain themselves at all. I
               | believe free markets and meritocracy are two systems
               | commonly pointed to today that may be 'ideal' in one
               | sense or another but which in practice cannot help but
               | sow the seeds of their own destruction.
               | 
               | Markets exist by virtue of laws created by governments -
               | property law being the primary example - expecting actors
               | in a free market who aggregate enough wealth to affect
               | those governments not to just strikes me as unrealistic.
               | It reminds me a bit of gaming. Everyone agrees that in a
               | competitive game the most fun part is early on before a
               | 'meta' can be established. But of course that meta will
               | always end up established and it's basically dumb to be
               | mad at people for metagaming or to otherwise expect them
               | not to.
        
               | tverbeure wrote:
               | Instead of advocating for and gambling on a "free market"
               | health care system that has never been tried successfully
               | anywhere, and hoping that it will work out (because
               | dogma?), why not advocate for systems that have been
               | tried all over the world that have been proven to work?
               | 
               | I'd sign up for a significant increase in my taxes if the
               | US system were replaced by the system that I experienced
               | in Belgium for the first 30 years of my life.
               | 
               | And by successfully, I mean: everybody, irrespective of
               | income or status, can expect to get the care they need.
        
               | throwaway0a5e wrote:
               | It takes an exceptional breed of ignorance to say "just
               | implement whatever <country> has" as if that is a silver
               | bullet and that the same forces that caused the current
               | debacle wouldn't also do their magic on anything we
               | attempt to transition to.
               | 
               | If it was as easy as paying out way out of the problem
               | we'd have done it already.
        
               | tverbeure wrote:
               | It also takes an exceptional amount of knee jerk assery
               | to interpret my comment as "change the US system to the
               | Belgian one". The Belgian system is one that works more
               | or less from my experience. Most inhabitants of Germany,
               | France, the Netherlands, and others will claim the same
               | for theirs.
               | 
               | Nobody is claiming that the US should copy the system of
               | some specific country verbatim. But it's equally dumb to
               | dismiss the common traits of these other systems, and say
               | "nah, let's do just the opposite."
        
               | throwaway0a5e wrote:
               | >It also takes an exceptional amount of knee jerk assery
               | to interpret my comment as "change the US system to the
               | Belgian one"
               | 
               | Well you literally said "I'd sign up for a significant
               | increase in my taxes if the US system were replaced by
               | the system that I experienced in Belgium for the first 30
               | years of my life" so why don't you tell me how that was
               | supposed to be interpreted?
               | 
               | America shares a very long border with a nation with a
               | functional healthcare system and we generally prefer to
               | compare to them.
        
               | tverbeure wrote:
               | I wrote "why not advocate for systems". Notice the plural
               | form. Did you assume that by writing "all over the
               | world", I actually meant the superpower of Belgium?
               | 
               | What all those systems have in common is that they are a
               | mix of free market and strong regulation. The opposite of
               | "let's do even more free market than what we have now."
               | 
               | I don't know how the US can get there. It's probably
               | impossible, just like school shootings and the "No Way To
               | Prevent This,' Says Only Nation Where This Regularly
               | Happens" argument.
        
               | pitaj wrote:
               | The free market healthcare system in the USA worked great
               | up until regulations pushing out mutual aid societies
               | completely changed it. Costs were affordable for
               | everyone.
               | 
               | http://freenation.org/a/f12l3.html
        
               | JaimeThompson wrote:
               | >Free markets are the most efficient way for information
               | to be transferred throughout the system.
               | 
               | Would such a market allow NDAs?
        
               | thomasahle wrote:
               | Monopolization and regulatory capture are standard
               | features of free markets, if you leaving them running
               | long enough.
        
               | AlexandrB wrote:
               | > Free markets are the most efficient way for information
               | to be transferred throughout the system.
               | 
               | What do you think of VC-funded "growth" companies that
               | lose money for years while providing products/services at
               | below cost? Is this a case of the free market working or
               | of it being subverted?
        
               | thedataslinger wrote:
               | Wait, wait, wait--you're saying that we need to solve
               | issues like regulatory capture through legislation... so
               | that we can have a market without governmental
               | interference (aka a "free market")? Huh?
               | 
               | You can't on the one hand tout the "free market", while
               | on the other complain that we don't have the "right" kind
               | of governmental interference.
               | 
               | Even if you could square that circle, it still sounds
               | disingenuous to argue that we could have the most
               | efficient system if only we were to eliminate _thing that
               | said system actively encourages_. The failure is baked
               | into the game, my friend.
        
               | Cederfjard wrote:
               | I don't think that reasoning is necessarily unsound. For
               | there to be regulatory capture, there needs to be
               | regulation. The legislation proposed could be to remove
               | or minimize that regulation, and thus limit the "hooks"
               | whereby to capture it with. Replacing "governmental
               | interference" with "less governmental interference", not
               | "different governmental interference".
               | 
               | I don't take such a libertarian view myself, by the way.
               | Just pointing out that I don't think you can pick apart
               | the argument of the person you replied to in that way.
        
               | elhudy wrote:
               | The healthcare industry disaster wasn't born out of
               | regulatory control - though money does now follow the
               | regulations. The disaster was born out of regulatory
               | mistakes(in particular, look back to the 1940's when the
               | govt made it tax free to offer health insurance as a
               | benefit). [1]
               | 
               | The industry is an onion and in order to understand why
               | it is the way it is today you need to peel back all of
               | the layers that have been added by the govt over time and
               | the unintended consequences of those.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.npr.org/2020/10/07/921287295/history-of-
               | employer...
        
               | lghh wrote:
               | There is no such thing as free market capitalism. This is
               | why the parent comment said "capitalism" and not "free
               | markets". I assume that's what you meant by putting "free
               | market" in quotes, I'm just making an explicit
               | clarification.
        
               | Clubber wrote:
               | I would say the drug cartels are about as close to free
               | market capitalism as we have today. They are largely
               | unregulated because they can either buy off the
               | regulators / government, or fight them with armies.
        
               | slothtrop wrote:
               | The U.S. economy isn't unfettered free market, including
               | in this sector. The policy is just bad.
        
         | Aperocky wrote:
         | > they can 10x their profits by only serving elderly clients.
         | 
         | I knew of certain defunct malls that decided to get rid of
         | things that doesn't make money and only keep the high profit
         | inventories.
         | 
         | Soon people stopped coming and they went under..
        
           | mumblemumble wrote:
           | The Invisible Hand works generally fine-ish for non-essential
           | and commodity goods. People might be sad their favorite store
           | went away, but, for the most part, life goes on. It seems to
           | even be the least bad way to handle these sorts of things.
           | 
           | It's a bit harder for me to see this as an acceptable
           | approach to health care. Not every segment of the economy
           | needs to be a constant drunkard's walk in search of maximum
           | profitability in the aggregate. Sometimes what the public
           | actually desires is stability and reliability.
        
           | throwawaygh wrote:
           | _> > they can 10x their profits by only serving elderly
           | clients._
           | 
           |  _> Soon people stopped coming_
           | 
           | Ah, yes. Why didn't we think of this before? By increasing
           | the cost of (geriatric) healthcare, we can destroy demand.
           | That's how supply/demand curves work right? In this way the
           | invisible hand delivers unto us a fountain of youth ;)
        
             | Aperocky wrote:
             | They may 10x their profit by serving elderly clients but
             | that is assuming x more elderly clients would want to
             | suddenly come.
             | 
             | But why? Are elderly clients underserved in that area? Are
             | they going to ditch their original care provider and all
             | come here?
        
               | throwawaygh wrote:
               | _> But why?_
               | 
               | Old people in the USA are EXTREMELY wealthy in terms of
               | healthcare purchasing power. All retired people have
               | medicare. Many retired people have additional healthcare
               | coverage from their former employers (doesn't exist
               | anymore -- disappeared along with pensions -- but this
               | benefit used to be common). Many retired people have
               | significant savings in addition to medicare and private
               | health insurance.
               | 
               | Most new parents have little to no government assistance,
               | do not have significant expendable income, and have
               | little to no accumulated wealth. Children, of course, are
               | even poorer than their deadbeat parents.
        
           | titanomachy wrote:
           | If we stop providing health care to young people, then
           | everyone will just die and there won't be any old people left
           | to profit off of.
        
             | cryptonector wrote:
             | No, more likely you'd see a ton of alternative medicine and
             | self-diagnostic/treatment options for young people. I'm not
             | entirely sure that I wouldn't want this.
        
         | ugh123 wrote:
         | Capitalism and health care just don't mix
        
         | whimsicalism wrote:
         | > The entire purpose of this organization was to provide
         | pediatric healthcare, and it wasn't losing money...
         | 
         | If it's entire purpose was to provide pediatric healthcare it
         | should probably have registered itself as a not-for-profit.
        
           | germinalphrase wrote:
           | Why register as a not-for-profit when you're profitable?
        
             | dragonwriter wrote:
             | > Why register as a not-for-profit when you're profitable?
             | 
             | If your purpose isn't to return a profit to stakeholders,
             | but to serve some social purpose eligible for charity
             | nonprofit status plus like "pediatric healthcare",
             | registering as a nonprofit gives you more surplus revenue
             | because of tax exemption _and_ the ability to accept
             | donations that are tax deductible for the donors.
             | 
             | It's also often good PR.
        
         | anonporridge wrote:
         | Cronus devouring his children.
        
         | black_puppydog wrote:
         | Yeah if they're only after profits, why not become a hedge
         | fund?
        
           | 93po wrote:
           | Many are owned by hedge funds:
           | 
           | https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/private-equity-
           | fi...
        
           | Kranar wrote:
           | The majority of hedge funds fail within 3 years, having never
           | reached profitability.
        
           | whimsicalism wrote:
           | Becoming a hedge fund is actually a bad idea if you are only
           | after profits because it is unclear that over long-time
           | horizon this is actually a very profitable activity. We only
           | remember the winners.
        
         | Bilal_io wrote:
         | So, a hospital can close a service with no repercussions, and
         | if workers at a "critical" secure decide to strike they'd be
         | ordered by a judge to get back to work...
         | 
         | I hate every part of it.
        
         | divbzero wrote:
         | There seems to be two sides to this.
         | 
         | The first, mentioned already in this thread, is that maximizing
         | profits should not be the ultimate yardstick in all cases.
         | 
         | The second is that we are not setting incentives correctly in
         | healthcare: preventative care still plays second fiddle to
         | curative care. If the healthcare industry were purely free
         | market, this could be attributed to individuals not
         | understanding the long-term benefits of preventative care, or
         | overly discounting the distant future. But the healthcare
         | system is _not_ purely free market. The largest payers, public
         | and private, could do a lot to correct the incentives by
         | setting their reimbursements accordingly.
        
         | hedora wrote:
         | We're facing some massive generational crises at this point,
         | and it feels like the only solution is to wait for the current
         | leadership to die off, and hope the gen x'ers fix it.
         | 
         | The WWII generation fixed the ozone hole, but their kids didn't
         | lift a finger for global warming.
         | 
         | Subsequent generations are scrambling to pick up the pieces for
         | our kids, while crap like this, and our rapidly collapsing
         | democracy keep sabotaging our efforts. Heck, in California,
         | we're actively causing psychological harm to an entire
         | generation of kids (with masks) because of a tiny minority of
         | anti-vaxxer school teachers.
         | 
         | Of course, progressive boomers exist, as do idiotic younger
         | people. However, the current generation of leadership in the US
         | has completely failed us.
         | 
         | Anyway, it's not surprising to me that that crowd decided to
         | shunt healthcare resources away from their (great) grandkids
         | and into elder care.
        
           | ISL wrote:
           | The WWII generation may have worked to fix the ozone hole,
           | but they also unknowingly created it:
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorofluorocarbon#History
        
             | karmelapple wrote:
             | And all of the generations helped create climate change,
             | yet we're not doing all that much to comprehensively combat
             | it at a government level.
        
           | whimsicalism wrote:
           | > The WWII generation fixed the ozone hole, but their kids
           | didn't lift a finger for global warming.
           | 
           | Let's not pretend these are comparable challenges.
           | 
           | > our rapidly collapsing democracy keep sabotaging our
           | efforts.
           | 
           | When people say stuff like this, are they being hyperbolic or
           | do they actually mean it? How long is the democratic
           | tradition in the US that is collapsing?
        
             | germinalphrase wrote:
             | If they're not being hyperbolic, they might be reacting to
             | stories like this:
             | 
             | https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/j-michael-luttig-op-ed-
             | ja...
        
             | rurp wrote:
             | We just had a candidate openly try to steal the last
             | presidential election and face no real consequences as a
             | result. In fact, it likely strengthened his position. 10
             | years ago I would have thought the end of American
             | democracy was extremely unlikely, now though we're only a
             | few small steps away and that bridge could be crossed at
             | any point.
             | 
             | This isn't some outlier event either, democracy has been
             | receding around the world for years. I really, really hope
             | the trend reverses itself, but am scared at how real the
             | threat is.
        
               | whimsicalism wrote:
               | I don't think we were even _remotely_ close to somehow
               | Trump remaining on as president.
               | 
               | > democracy has been receding around the world for years
               | 
               | I am skeptical. Majoritarian democracy in the US has only
               | really existed for 40-50 years and I perceive it as
               | continuing to expand both here and abroad.
        
           | cogman10 wrote:
           | While I think SOME longevity in congress/the senate is a good
           | thing (You get more done). I really wish we had something
           | like an age cap.
           | 
           | It's really crazy that the only way it seems like we can get
           | these senators/congresspeople out of office is death from old
           | age.
           | 
           | The fact is, your mind DOES deteriorate when you get older.
           | That's why so many phone scams are special built to target
           | older people.
           | 
           | A change I'd make to the constitution is that "nobody over
           | the age of 70 can hold a governmental position".
        
             | manmal wrote:
             | Please, don't spread ageism. Yes, brains perform worse in
             | many kinds of ways when they age. But that's highly
             | variable. And there are narcissists and sociopaths in every
             | age group.
        
             | throwawayboise wrote:
             | Mandatory retirement is a thing in a lot of professions.
             | Should be in government as well.
        
           | usrn wrote:
           | It's possible we have _too much_ democracy. A lot of stuff
           | got changed because we thought the previous configuration
           | didn 't make sense but it may have been that way for a
           | reason.
        
             | JaimeThompson wrote:
             | Which things do you thing should change back and what
             | should they change back into?
        
               | I-M-S wrote:
               | End to NIMBYism. Current homeowners should not be able to
               | block new developments and encase a neighbourhood in
               | amber.
        
               | JaimeThompson wrote:
               | It would need to apply to everyone. No more of this open
               | up single family housing is this middle class area while
               | protecting the parks / forest in the wealthy areas.
               | 
               | What about things like AirBnB? Limiting those is a form
               | of NIMBYism as is limiting where factories and polluting
               | buildings can be placed and/ran.
        
               | whimsicalism wrote:
               | We want people to be housed in the places they want to
               | live which is why we want to lessen restrictions on
               | building.
        
               | usrn wrote:
        
               | whimsicalism wrote:
               | No more election of judges.
               | 
               | Campaign finance restrictions.
               | 
               | Referenda that can't be overriden by legislature should
               | require 50% of eligible voter population to support, not
               | 50% of voters in that particular election.
               | 
               | No special elections.
        
           | bsedlm wrote:
           | > We're facing some massive generational crises at this
           | point, and it feels like the only solution is to wait for the
           | current leadership to die off, and hope the gen x'ers fix it.
           | 
           | oh man, I choose to laugh so I don't start crying hahaha.
           | 
           | I want to turn this into an argument of why age-reversal and
           | other longevity research is such a bad idea (personally, I
           | think it's kind of evil; but maybe I've seen too many
           | villanous cartoon characters throwing everything under the
           | bus so the can live forever).
        
             | wardedVibe wrote:
             | I mean, making sure Putin doesn't live forever seems like a
             | pretty high priority to me.
             | 
             | There's also the fact that science might lock up, since old
             | scientists have more reputation at stake in the old
             | theories (there's an adage "science advances one funeral at
             | a time"). We're not ready as a species for immortality
        
               | BLKNSLVR wrote:
               | That quote applies to many (all?) disciplines:
               | 
               | "X advances one funeral at a time".
        
         | archon810 wrote:
         | Can you share the hospital name?
        
       | bkjelden wrote:
       | Not surprising. My partner is a DNP and has pretty strongly
       | considered leaving the entire profession.
       | 
       | From my perspective, the entire healthcare industry is set up to
       | treat any frontline worker without an MD after their name as
       | completely expendable, nothing more than a row in a spreadsheet
       | that can be optimized for middle management to hit next quarter's
       | bonus targets.
       | 
       | You can meet all metrics management sets out for you, have
       | amazing patient satisfaction scores, etc, and every 6 months some
       | spreadsheet wielding online MBA graduate is going to show up to
       | turn the screws and tell you you need to work harder for the same
       | pay, and to just be happy you aren't getting laid off.
       | 
       | At some point in time, the workers realize the joke is on them
       | and find another profession.
        
         | vincnetas wrote:
         | Do nurses have work unions? Would that solve the issue?
        
           | tick_tock_tick wrote:
           | Yes, they have massive unions but that doesn't seem to be
           | helping.
        
           | asmithmd1 wrote:
           | Yes. Massachusetts which is NOT a right-to-work state. That
           | means the union can negotiate a clause in the contract that
           | any nurses working at the hospital must join the union. Here
           | is a current contract that includes pay ranges:
           | 
           | https://www.massnurses.org/public/resources/bargaining-
           | unit/...
           | 
           | 'Step' is years of experience
        
           | bkjelden wrote:
           | In some states, RNs working in hospitals are unionized. And
           | that does help with some of the things I mentioned.
           | 
           | Outside of hospitals, and outside of RNs, unionization is
           | much less common. E.g. in a clinic setting very few employees
           | are unionized.
        
         | UnpossibleJim wrote:
         | This is totally anecdotal, so take it for what it's worth, but
         | in addition to nurses leaving the profession I've seen quite a
         | few doctors in my area leaving the profession as well.
         | Relatively young men and women retiring the profession
         | completely post pandemic, though I haven't had an opportunity,
         | nor would I, to ask them why they left the position. I have no
         | idea if it has anything to do with the pandemic or the
         | administration or working with insurance =/
         | 
         | here are some "articles" on the subject:
         | 
         | https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1594
         | 
         | https://www.beckersasc.com/benchmarking/22-of-physicians-con...
         | 
         | https://www.medpagetoday.com/practicemanagement/practicemana...
         | 
         | And one of these articles (the last) is from 2013, talking
         | about a change in healthcare practices (corporate unification),
         | the ACA (limits on accepting medicare patients) and the health
         | reform law (liability reform). So, I guess medical burnout has
         | been coming log before Covid and we have just been ignoring it?
        
           | bkjelden wrote:
           | I have no doubt that MDs are leaving as well - but, at least
           | from my perspective, in any large healthcare system, there is
           | a drastic difference between the way middle management treats
           | MDs and the way they treat everyone else. The latter is
           | completely expendable, whereas the MDs do have a fair amount
           | of negotiating leverage around their working conditions.
        
             | UnpossibleJim wrote:
             | Oh, don't get me wrong. The way nurses are treated is
             | horrible. I wasn't arguing that and I hope it didn't come
             | across that way.
        
               | bkjelden wrote:
               | Not at all!
               | 
               | I'm just sharing what I've seen - middle management
               | treats MDs drastically different than NPs and PAs, even
               | in states where the latter have almost the same scope of
               | practice.
               | 
               | This is not to say that MDs don't have their own reasons
               | to be mad at the system - insurance, changes in patient
               | attitudes, etc.
        
         | thr0wawayf00 wrote:
         | Doctors aren't happy about it either.
         | 
         | I was at my family's Easter lunch last week and one of my
         | uncles who's an MD was telling me about the mass exodus of
         | doctors from the profession since COVID hit. Anyone who was
         | thinking about retiring did so once the pandemic took off.
         | 
         | He then tried to convince me that I'm not too old to go to
         | medical school. Yeah, no thanks.
        
         | derekdahmer wrote:
         | Same story from my partner who is a PA. The private practice
         | she worked for for years got acquired by a big name system and
         | over the next 2 years they "optimized" a job she loved so far
         | that she had to leave.
         | 
         | By the end she was seeing twice as many patients a day as
         | before with no time to do admin stuff at work even after
         | skipping her lunch break so she also had to do more work when
         | she got home. The reward for doing double the work as before? A
         | 10% pay increase barely above inflation. Meanwhile a few
         | coworkers left and no new ones were hired so the workload just
         | kept increasing.
         | 
         | It puts providers in such a bad position because the only way
         | to push back is to drop the level of care, which has real human
         | consequences.
        
       | xeornet wrote:
       | Many people in many professions have the same considerations
       | about leaving. But then they realise they have a mortgage to pay,
       | responsibilities (debts) they have signed up for, and never
       | leave. Such is the system.
        
       | rdtwo wrote:
       | Another wage shortages (for the quality of work conditions) that
       | will be reported as a worker shortage
        
       | poorbutdebtfree wrote:
       | People should stop giving them such a hard time for dancing every
       | once in a while.
        
       | oliverafajardo wrote:
       | My experience: I'm an icu nurse in the sf bay area. I make a good
       | salary. However, you can make this and more with a job with less
       | physical and emotional stress/abuse. Even the "best" hospitals
       | like kaiser/stanford/ucsf are always short staffed. I considered
       | another area of nursing/hc but it's really all the same BS of
       | being short staffed, constantly being denied vacations, etc.
       | 
       | I feel like a waitress, custodian, social worker, therapist,
       | punching bag and other stuff - It's never ending. This has
       | effected my mental health so much that I am slowly doing my
       | career switch to SWE. While I know every job has it's own
       | difficulties bs/stress/politics, the one's i deal with as a nurse
       | now I can no longer deal with. I don't regret this career path
       | because it has taught me a lot, and their is something better for
       | me out there.
       | 
       | Career: I did consider other areas of nursing, but they didn't
       | satisfy me, ICU is relatively the most enjoyable for me. On a
       | regular hospital floor/intermediate floor, a nurse will be given
       | 4-5 patients and let me tell you its a ZOO! In ICU i only have 2,
       | and those keep you busy the whole shift. They're both different
       | kinds of crazy.
       | 
       | I will say, being a nurse in California is 5x better than
       | anywhere else simply because their are laws that allow us to have
       | uninterrupted breaks!
        
       | gsatic wrote:
       | Depressing. It's like we are losing control of different
       | subsystems of Jurassic Park every single day :(
        
       | gigel82 wrote:
       | We've read similar reports about the "great resignation" with
       | software engineers. Attrition is actually lower now than it was
       | before the pandemic, so...
        
       | rel2thr wrote:
       | Wages need to go up. Also I think there will be a big push to
       | open up immigration to nurses and doctors over the coming decades
       | 
       | Kind of weird that the usa prioritizes software developers over
       | healthcare workers in the immigration system .
        
         | lotsofpulp wrote:
         | There has long been an immigration program for foreign doctors
         | to gain the right to live and work in the US in exchange for
         | first living in a rural/poor part of the US where most doctors
         | do not want to live.
        
         | aluva wrote:
         | If have a nursing degree it's easy to immigrate to USA, in fact
         | you will be coming in with a green card unlike tech worker. So
         | to your point, US does prioritize nurses over others. Doctors
         | are different and it's incredibly difficult for a doctor with a
         | foreign degree to practice in US. I know this for a fact since
         | I come a place where almost every other house has a nurse
         | working in Europe/US
        
           | lotsofpulp wrote:
           | https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-
           | eligibility/gree...
           | 
           | Immigrant doctors have to be willing to live in the least
           | popular parts of the US.
           | 
           | > One reason USCIS may grant the national interest waiver is
           | because a physician agrees to work for a period of time in a
           | designated underserved area.
        
       | maerF0x0 wrote:
       | Cynicism and complaint is our zeitgeist. Answer me how many
       | actually left in year prior if you want my attention.
       | 
       | Lots of considering leaving a profession, also considering losing
       | fat on Jan 1, and saving for retirement.
       | 
       | When people are surveyed there is a big difference between why
       | they say and why they actually are doing the action. For example
       | "Yeah, covid has been tough... and those insurance companies
       | though... And doctors really dont respect my profession... Oh my
       | [pregnancy/parental leave/dream of being a DJ]? yeah that has
       | nothing to do with it."
       | 
       | These kinds of opinion surveys are just barely "science" .
        
       | hemreldop wrote:
        
       | tmcw wrote:
       | Similarly via a quick Google search:
       | 
       | - "Almost HALF Of San Francisco Residents Considering Leaving
       | City" (according to survey of 500)
       | 
       | - "One in three New Yorkers Considering Leaving The State"
       | 
       | - "Over Half Of Young Lawyers Considering Quitting by 2027, IBA
       | Report."
       | 
       | Look for X people considering Y, and you'll find them.
       | Considering is cheap.
       | 
       | The awful experience of nurses, absolutely, true. But this, like
       | so many others, is a silly poll that doesn't say anything.
        
         | tsol wrote:
         | I don't mean to by cynical, but this is kind of my feeling.
         | Throughout the pandemic I saw story and story about nurses
         | getting overworked and being underappreciated. There was lots
         | of talk of a nurse exodus.. and yet it's never happened. Even
         | now it's just talk of a possible exodus. Maybe there are just
         | no similar fields to switch into with comparable pay, but it
         | seems as though nurses are sticking it out in the grand scheme.
         | Are plenty of older nurses retiring? Yes. Are some younger
         | nurses also leaving the field after being burned? Yep. But for
         | the majority of nurses, the pay is still worth all the
         | difficulty they see. Hearing about a co-worker getting attacked
         | by an anti-vax patient is alarming, but until it happens to you
         | you're not gonna make any major life changes to avoid that
        
       | chimprich wrote:
       | My wife is a nurse in the NHS. She actually saves people from
       | cancer, or at least prolongs their lives. Her work is difficult,
       | with huge responsibility. She gets a pay cut this year in real
       | terms.
       | 
       | I make slight improvements to computer systems. In most of the
       | jobs I've done, despite my best efforts to work for reasonably
       | ethical companies, I've not been convinced I've made anyone's
       | lives better. Yet my salary is 2-3 times hers.
       | 
       | I find it hard to believe there can't be a better way to arrange
       | this kind of stuff.
        
         | mikkergp wrote:
         | It's an interesting problem, because we currently align
         | economic 'productivity' and pay rather than social value and
         | pay, which is efficient since we don't have to redistribute
         | resources between industries or roles, and resource
         | redistribution is a dirty word, at least in America. My wife is
         | a doctor and I make significantly more than her working as an
         | SRE, when her job is significantly more difficult (particularly
         | emotionally) and time consuming than mine. She's paid
         | relatively well on a societal scale, but I'd still call it a
         | labor of love. If you're not in one of the high paid
         | specialties, you don't do it for the money.
         | 
         | Even in the (US) medical system, pay/insurance reimbursement is
         | based on the number of procedures you do, not how involved the
         | treatment is. This is why surgeons get paid so much more.
        
           | dudul wrote:
           | We do not align productivity and pay, we simply align pay and
           | how difficult it is to find someone to do the job.
        
             | mikkergp wrote:
             | Not directly, but indirectly, this is one reason why bigger
             | companies can pay more than small companies, more
             | efficiencies, automations, and economies of scale means the
             | output per employee is higher.
        
           | gruez wrote:
           | >It's an interesting problem, because we currently align
           | economic 'productivity' and pay rather than social value and
           | pay
           | 
           | How do you define and measure "social value"?
        
           | tomatowurst wrote:
           | Athletes and celebrities are paid because of economic
           | productivity? It definitely seems like social value based on
           | restricted supplies.
           | 
           | If there are lot of participants in a labor pool, naturally
           | wages will be under constant pressure. The barriers to entry
           | also play a role.
           | 
           | For those RN's quitting, they will simply be replaced by
           | foreign workers. It's similar to how certain jobs no longer
           | have locals in it anymore, instead relying on migrant
           | workers. It's the reality in Singapore for instance and
           | naturally creates an implicit caste system.
           | 
           | Now the markets have evolved/evolving where incumbent locals
           | are no longer granted the same privileges they once enjoyed,
           | somebody who does not have the luxury to consider
           | alternatives will be the ones who fill the jobs, and get the
           | blame when the descendants of local incumbents cannot make
           | their way back.
           | 
           | This is sort of the system I am seeing emerging and it
           | explains the anxiety of us vs them. In reality, the
           | government, markets simply do not care for such
           | superficiality. It seeks to accomodate those who are
           | productive, not sit around waiting for higher powers to
           | "fix". And as such, this dynamic ensures wages in certain
           | industries stagnate, and it's especially true in markets with
           | the characteristics I mentioned above: low barrier to entry
           | and abundant supply of labor.
        
       | r3trohack3r wrote:
       | Anecdotally - I have an acquaintance exiting the field of
       | pediatric nursing. They worked in the ICU and with chronic
       | conditions (cancer, heart disease, etc.).
       | 
       | The deaths were always hard when working with little kids - and
       | there were a couple a month. But towards the end of COVID they
       | were losing 4 kids PER WEEK (anecdote - I have no data other than
       | listening to them vent) that this nurse firmly believed were
       | avoidable had they received appropriate care.
       | 
       | What caused them to exit was how the hospital handled COVID: they
       | postponed all elective surgeries. For these children, an elective
       | surgery was anything where they "wouldn't die tomorrow" if the
       | surgery wasn't done (somewhat of an oversimplification - but
       | ballpark correct).
       | 
       | During that time hearts got worse, cancer progressed, bodies shut
       | down until electives became emergencies... Success rates of
       | surgeries dropped. And once restrictions started lifting the
       | staff was underwater, they had a huge backlog of "electives"
       | piled up on top of the normal ingress - kids were dying from
       | waiting.
        
       | pessimizer wrote:
       | They'll leave with the teachers. Female-coded professions being
       | derided for political capital as often as "inner-city crime"
       | might tempt one to wonder which came first, the female-coding or
       | the disrespect.
       | 
       | Just kidding. Teachers used to almost all be male until public
       | schooling and the resultant budgeting turned them female (to pay
       | them less.) It's like reverse computer-programming where the
       | profession turned male when they started paying more.
       | 
       | Pay them and they won't leave. Pay them a lot, and dudes will
       | start writing essays about how the reason women aren't being
       | hired and are leaving the profession is because they naturally
       | have less of an interest and aptitude for nursing than males.
        
         | tomatowurst wrote:
         | There's no need to politicize this off completely unrelated
         | tangent. The whole industry is under stress. It won't change.
         | They will just hire foreign workers to deal with shortages.
        
       | nickstewart wrote:
       | My wife is a NICU nurse at a major NICU... she has worked there
       | four years and is almost at her maximum pay, outside of COL
       | increases, so right now she makes around $64k a year before
       | tax/etc..
       | 
       | The travel nurses make significantly more and now that she has
       | basically hit her cap (after just four years) I've been trying to
       | convince her to move to a different unit or get a different job
        
       | Victerius wrote:
       | U.S. nursing salaries relative to average U.S. wages are above
       | the OECD average: https://www.oecd-
       | ilibrary.org/sites/health_glance-2017-58-en...
       | 
       | So pay isn't the problem.
       | 
       | The U.S. is also above the OECD average for the number of nurses
       | per 1000 population:
       | https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334515420/figure/fi...
       | 
       | So staffing isn't the problem either.
       | 
       | The U.S. is below the OECD average for the number of doctors per
       | 1000 population:
       | https://www.nurses.co.uk/Images/Blog/media/ddad9fa9-b06d-43d...
       | 
       | If nurses could work a regular 40 hours a week and be paid more,
       | as they would like, the additional money and staffing need to
       | come from somewhere. In the United States, we've decided that
       | private hospitals could have the right to exist. Most nurses are
       | thus beholden to a free market. So the question is why other
       | hospitals aren't trying to poach nurses with better wages and
       | schedules. The reason may be that the supply of nurses remains
       | large enough that hospitals don't feel pressured to make these
       | concessions. The business model of hospitals is also drastically
       | different from that of, e.g., tech companies. Tech companies can
       | afford to pay their employees outrageous salaries because it is
       | possible for one software engineer to create a product that will
       | generate $100M in revenue. A nurse's labor has a cap on how much
       | economic value it can generate. Hence why nursing salaries are
       | constrained.
        
         | shadowofneptune wrote:
         | From such a high level, staffing may not seem like a problem.
         | When it comes to the hospital floor level, staffing's been a
         | big issue these last two years. Keep in mind that the common 12
         | hour shift for a nurse came about because of 70s staff
         | shortages.
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | > U.S. nursing salaries relative to average U.S. wages are
         | above the OECD ... So pay isn't the problem
         | 
         | Do you think when someone evaluates if they're paid enough
         | they're thinking 'what is my income relative to what someone
         | else's income is in Belgium relative to other people in
         | Belgium?'
        
         | MisterBastahrd wrote:
         | ?
         | 
         | Most nurses work three 12 hour shifts and are paid for 40. It's
         | so prevalent that a lot of them will pick up an extra shift or
         | two at an entirely different hospital.
        
         | woodruffw wrote:
         | These numbers don't necessarily tell the full story, since
         | "nurse" isn't necessarily a fungible title across the OECD:
         | nursing requirements and qualifications vary by country, as do
         | the job's obligations. This is probably particularly true
         | during the last two years, as nurses (everywhere, but
         | particularly in areas that have refused vaccination) have
         | assumed greater daily responsibilities.
        
         | kemayo wrote:
         | It sounds like your last statistic means that U.S. nurses need
         | to do more work than their counterparts in other countries (to
         | make up for a lack of doctors), which suggests that pay and
         | staffing _might well_ be the problem...
        
         | manuelabeledo wrote:
         | Comparing the US with OECD isn't proof that pay or staffing
         | aren't part of the problem. Nurses can be underpaid, and still
         | earn more than their peers in other countries.
         | 
         | Also, it looks like the outrageous costs of healthcare in the
         | US don't correlate at all with nurses' wages. If I were a
         | nurse, I would feel demoralised if I was doing a lot of the
         | hard work, yet administrators and middlemen still get the most
         | money.
        
         | Ensorceled wrote:
         | Canadian nurses are also leaving the profession in droves for
         | many of the same reasons ... so this might be a universal
         | problem.
        
         | fnordpiglet wrote:
         | They do detail what the nurses themselves say are the problems
         | in the article. I'm not sure I see a reason to doubt their
         | reasons. They didn't identify a shortage of doctors but rather
         | a shortage of low skilled workers whose jobs they're having to
         | pick up in addition. Also while the population ratios might be
         | in their favor, apparently the patient to nurse ratios aren't.
         | Even if they're better than most of the world that doesn't mean
         | they're necessarily happy - when you're unhappy telling someone
         | that there's someone worse off doesn't improve their situation.
        
         | krisoft wrote:
         | > So pay isn't the problem.
         | 
         | Or pay is a problem elsewhere too.
        
         | JaimeThompson wrote:
         | >So staffing isn't the problem either.
         | 
         | You don't have enough data to determine that as you are
         | assuming that the staffing levels should be the same between
         | countries when due to things like a huge push to increase
         | profits, more paperwork, and other such things they can be
         | drastically different.
        
       | nine_zeros wrote:
       | From my friends anecdotal experience, burnout in medical industry
       | is partly due to too much administrative work.
       | 
       | It is also partly because the number of patients is increasing
       | disproportionately, mostly because people are getting older. An
       | individual at the age of 50 needed fewer medical appointments
       | than an individual at the age of 70. That's literally from 2002
       | to today.
       | 
       | There just aren't enough nurses and doctors to tend to such a
       | large old population.
        
       | FactualActuals wrote:
       | High stress environment, stagnant wages unless you're a travel
       | nurse, underappreciated during the pandemic, and having friends
       | turn on you because they associate you with some crazy conspiracy
       | theory. These are all reasons I've heard of career nurses
       | quitting and going into other industries.
        
         | Ensorceled wrote:
         | Conflicts with patients and their families. Politicians
         | claiming you are overpaid and your friends and family believing
         | them. Increased responsibilities without increased pay,
         | something experienced nurses really feel.
         | 
         | I'm trying to think of how any of those can be solved with
         | "technology" :-/
        
           | starik36 wrote:
           | This I have to hear. What politician is claiming that nurses
           | are overpaid?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | duxup wrote:
         | I was under the impression that nurses were paid pretty well
         | (generally speaking).
        
           | zdragnar wrote:
           | It depends on where you go (and when; things have changed
           | somewhat recently) but I know some CNAs who never became RNs
           | because the time it would have taken to claw back the money
           | spent on the degree wasn't worth the added stress of actually
           | being an RN.
        
           | omginternets wrote:
           | I went to an undergraduate school with a fairly large nursing
           | program, and interacted with a fair number of nursing
           | students. One thing I noted was that a large proportion of
           | nursing students were first-generation college students from
           | lower-middle-class and working class backgrounds. I suspect
           | that the meme of nursing being "well paid" stems from the
           | fact that it is a step-up in that context.
        
             | gedy wrote:
             | This is my antidotal experience as well from extended
             | family and friends. Many (mostly young women) weren't
             | really sure what to do and picked nursing because "it pays
             | well" and had a romanticized/simplistic view of nursing.
             | Didn't seem particularly interested or passionate about it,
             | so I can see how many would lose interest once the reality
             | of the hard work in the midst of a pandemic.
        
           | bryanlarsen wrote:
           | Sure, there are lots of nurses making well into the 6
           | figures. But they're working 60-80 hours a week, most of them
           | night shifts.
           | 
           | A nice 9-5 weekday nursing job makes a couple dollars more
           | per hour than the receptionist out front.
        
           | woodruffw wrote:
           | Nurses are paid well, relative to the average American
           | salary. I don't think they're paid particularly well relative
           | to the job's lifestyle requirements and latent stress levels,
           | especially during a pandemic.
           | 
           | Looking at my area (NYC), I'd have to take over a 50% pay cut
           | from my engineering job to be "paid well" as a nurse. And I
           | suspect my job is a lot less stressful.
        
             | duxup wrote:
             | That's not that usual of a dynamic.
             | 
             | I think the "hardest" job I ever worked was a PC tech
             | support call center or a job at a pizza place. I didn't
             | pick my hours ... and the job was a heck of a lot harder
             | than my coding job that pays WAY more.
             | 
             | But it wasn't like I could just go and get a coding job at
             | the drop of a hat.
        
               | woodruffw wrote:
               | Sure. Both programming and nursing are relatively niche
               | fields. Nursing is arguably a significantly more
               | _professional_ field, given that (1) formal requirements
               | are higher, and (2) Nurse Practitioners are effectively
               | educated at the MS level (versus a BS or lower for the
               | average programmer).
               | 
               | If we're using job difficulty and stress as some of our
               | metrics for fair pay, then I would argue that tech
               | support and pizza delivery should _also_ be higher
               | paying! But even with that, it doesn 't seem unreasonable
               | to factor in the professional qualifications (and
               | corresponding time and money commitments) required of
               | nursing. Relative to all three, it's a remarkably low-
               | paying job.
        
             | LegitShady wrote:
             | While I don't doubt that nurses have very high stress jobs,
             | the reason why you'd take a pay cut to become an nurse is
             | because their job is a lot less technically difficult.
             | 
             | I have some friends from university who became nurses, one
             | of which I was roommates with for two years during school.
             | I helped them study for 'their most difficult math test'
             | and it was a relatively straightforward test on changing
             | units. They would not have passed a first year calculus
             | class. The majority of their academic work was
             | memorization, and then lots of hands on work in hospitals.
             | The reason they get paid well is because the job is
             | important and stressful, not because it requires highly
             | technical people of which there is limited supply.
             | 
             | I don't say that as a slight - I know many nurses who are
             | very intelligent people, its merely a judgement as to the
             | academic rigor involved in getting your nursing
             | credentials.
             | 
             | PS I worked at home depot during busy periods in the summer
             | when the store was understaffed, I've worked as a waiter
             | where I was the only person on shift because the
             | owners/manager were idiots, and I've worked cleaning big
             | chicken barns out in preparation for new chickens and those
             | were all significantly more stressful than my technical
             | work. Stress is not correlated with difficulty or limit of
             | supply.
        
               | woodruffw wrote:
               | Were your friends NPs, CNAs, or something else? There's a
               | wide variety in nursing roles, with a corresponding wide
               | range in technical difficulty and expected proficiency.
               | The average NP is certainly more technically proficient
               | than the average undergraduate with a CS degree, albeit
               | not in a domain the CS undergraduate might understand.
               | 
               | Tangentially: I'm not sure what the relevancy of "passing
               | a first year calculus class" is. Just about every BA/BS
               | passes one, and I (a program analysis researcher) have
               | never even remotely needed by calculus knowledge in my
               | day job. I don't think it's a good proxy for technical
               | skill whatsoever, given that "technical skill" is a
               | domain-specific qualifier.
        
           | FactualActuals wrote:
           | I don't think they are paid as well as they should be
           | considering the need for most nurses now to be on-call 24/7
           | and dealing with the stress from patients and their families,
           | and administrative bloat.
        
           | klyrs wrote:
           | They're paid alright (generally speaking), but most devs
           | wouldn't even consider a job at that rate. And the bar for
           | entry is way higher: years of competitive and expensive
           | schooling.
           | 
           | And that's ignoring the other factors that GP mentioned. I
           | don't get assaulted on a daily/weekly basis. I'm not getting
           | coughed on by COVID-infected patients who want to kill me
           | because they don't believe that COVID is real. I don't endure
           | a regular drumbeat of patient deaths and the constant second-
           | guessing "what if I did X differently". I don't need to
           | handle people's bodily fluids. And then there's the politics,
           | internal and external (the conspiracy nuts, the fucked-up
           | pecking order in hospitals, unions, insurance- and pharma-
           | driven policies, politicization of healthcare, etc). I could
           | go on and on, and I only know one nurse personally.
           | 
           | Nurses are not paid anywhere near "pretty well." They're
           | treated like shit and the pay isn't anywhere near fair
           | compensation for the service that they provide.
        
             | listless wrote:
             | ShiftKey now has shifts listed for upwards of 80$+ per
             | hour. This is probably the future we're looking at and way
             | overdue.
        
             | duxup wrote:
             | >but most devs wouldn't even consider a job at that rate
             | 
             | Lots of people ... most people work jobs that fall into
             | that category.
             | 
             | I'm not sure that means much. I don't know how many folks
             | who go into nursing are likely to just chose to be a
             | developer or if it is that simple for them.
        
             | tubalcain wrote:
             | It makes zero sense for a person to consider straight-up
             | nursing as a career in this age. The school is too
             | competitive to get into, the pay isn't worth it, the job at
             | the end is laborious, the culture is vile. If one does go
             | into nursing, becoming an NP, CNA, or travel nurse are the
             | only logical options from a time invested to income and
             | burnout standpoint.
             | 
             | If a student wants a health care professional job, medicine
             | and dentistry are better options and require just as much
             | academic competition. Failing that, the student is better
             | off going into tech or law.
             | 
             | If they're not smart enough for either of those? I dunno?
             | Onlyfans? Permanent serfdom? I fear that our new society
             | will have many who are left behind and struggling.
        
         | bluesquared wrote:
         | Nurses are paid well compared to the average worker in the US,
         | but not compared to the service they provide. My wife, an RN
         | BSN, was hit with a pay _cut_ due to hospital system being
         | bought out by another larger one. That 's right, a pay _cut_ ,
         | during a pandemic. Now on a fixed pay scale, with no raises
         | built in. $3/hr shift differential for working night shift in
         | no way makes up for the strain it puts on your body, your free
         | time, and your relationships. Tons of attrition in her hospital
         | and department, no signs of retention bonuses or anything other
         | than a "We <3 our healthcare heroes" sign out front.
        
       | ryanmarsh wrote:
       | I'm going to offer a counter point, anecdotally of course. My
       | daughter is in university right now. She's a in pre-nursing. She
       | says most of the people in her major this year switched to
       | nursing from other majors during the pandemic because they saw it
       | as the most economically viable major compared to their previous
       | major. In a nutshell the pandemic scared people into being
       | pragmatic about their degree plan.
       | 
       | So hospital administration will have a fresh crop of graduates,
       | new to the system, to abuse. The cycle will continue unabated.
        
       | smm11 wrote:
       | It's the bare-minimum staffing that's done in nursing, in
       | addition to the bizarro pay scale.
        
       | nomoreusernames wrote:
       | think about this statement, good nurses are taking care of the
       | people you love the most in their most helpless hours. how
       | fucking cruel are we as a society for taking this type of love
       | for granted? its just wrong to use people like that. nurses
       | biggest psychological problem is that they ignore themselves and
       | love others and take care of them better. i think its really
       | shitty. like veterans of defensive wars.
        
       | Copenjin wrote:
       | It's the same in Europe, but I don't know if they are extremely
       | underpaid in the same way. Money could fix part of the problem.
        
       | vmception wrote:
       | Skimmed the article, what is that number like in other years?
        
       | kingkawn wrote:
       | Lots of blame being placed onto the business managerial class
       | that has turned hospitals and the practice of medicine into a
       | nightmare a la Kafka, but I think that the casual brutality of
       | the healthcare educational model deserves a ton of the blame for
       | this burnout. The reaction to all emotional trauma is to bury it
       | and place all the energy into negotiating for higher pay. Money
       | cannot endlessly sit in the place of enduring suffering, and the
       | professions (medicine, nursing, PA, etc) will continue to degrade
       | in quality as long as this barbaric understanding of emotional
       | health is encouraged in the educational institutions.
        
       | yalogin wrote:
       | Nurses is a tough profession. They are required to work for
       | longer hours and not paid that much. With Covid, dealing with
       | anti-science patients must have been very draining mentally. On
       | top of changing the working conditions and increasing pay, may be
       | we should make the nurses training free to make the field more
       | attractive.
        
       | ryanSrich wrote:
       | To the surprise of absolutely no one who understands healthcare.
       | 
       | I have many friends and relatives that are nurses, MDs, and
       | therapists.
       | 
       | Compensation is about as backwards as you can get. Seniority has
       | no impact on your pay. Once you hit the ceiling you'll never make
       | more money. This is especially true for Nurses and therapists.
       | Even if you switch jobs. The market rate is what you're going to
       | get paid (within 10%).
       | 
       | My wife is a PT and made 3x more traveling as a contract
       | therapist than she did as a full time employee. Three times.
       | That's absolutely absurd.
       | 
       | Benefits are also beyond comical. Healthcare insurance costs for
       | healthcare workers are higher and the benefits are worse than if
       | you just bought Obamacare directly.
       | 
       | Beyond horrible pay with no upward mobility, you'll also have to
       | deal with completely disconnected management that has never done
       | any clinical work in their lives. They'll bitch and moan about
       | saving money, and often enforce policies that put clinicians at
       | risk of malpractice. All to save money.
       | 
       | So yeah. If I were to give any young people advice, it would be
       | to stay as far away from healthcare as you can.
        
       | giarc wrote:
       | I work in healthcare but not as a nurse. I'm in a somewhat
       | obscure field that became pretty important during the pandemic
       | (infection control). No one outside the hospital knew we existed
       | before the pandemic. Then the pandemic hit, conspiracies' started
       | to float around and we had to take our contact list off the
       | public website as colleagues were receiving death threats.
       | 
       | I can't even imagine what nurses have gone through being front
       | line staff interacting with patients (and their families) all
       | day. We need a zero-tolerance policy for families that verbally
       | abuse front line staff, but instead they are often let off due to
       | "stress of a family member in hospital" or the need for "family
       | centered care".
        
       | JaimeThompson wrote:
       | Perhaps allowing modern MBAs to cost optimize most every single
       | thing we do isn't the best way to assure mid and long term
       | security and profitability.
        
         | tyrfing wrote:
         | Doesn't that pretty much start with the fact that Medicare pays
         | far under cost? "Just stop optimizing costs" is a hard sell
         | when a huge chunk of services are sold at a loss. Either
         | optimize the business or go bankrupt.
        
         | manuelabeledo wrote:
         | Maximising profit by cutting down wages and personnel is not a
         | MBA specific problem.
        
           | anarticle wrote:
           | Ah, but it is the only thing MBAs are "good" at. /s
        
           | ironmagma wrote:
           | It is a problem fostered by that culture though.
        
             | manuelabeledo wrote:
             | Is it, though.
             | 
             | If you have the opportunity to take a look at the content
             | of your typical business administration book, or even the
             | Harvard Business Review magazine, they essentially are
             | collections of success stories. Instead of setting the
             | narrative, they go and say "this or that worked/didn't
             | work, to get this company out of a slump".
             | 
             | The issue, I believe, stems from the fact that "bringing in
             | the MBAs" happens when a company doesn't hit inflated
             | targets, and for that you have to thank the c-suite, which
             | isn't necessarily a bunch of kids with master degrees.
        
               | ironmagma wrote:
               | In that content is the sometimes implicit, sometimes not-
               | so-implicit understanding that efficiency is something
               | positive. The very first thing a finance textbook will
               | inform you of is that the market is efficient and that
               | this is what allows it to function.
               | 
               | When in reality, efficiency and fragility are two sides
               | of the same coin. You might not want to maximize your
               | efficiency if you also want to be resilient.
        
         | katbyte wrote:
         | Cost optimization usually have huge gaps in things that are
         | hard to measure like onboarding cost/time or morale or benefits
         | of experience. Who cares about any of that when you can make
         | the shareholders another million a the expense of literally
         | everyone else?
        
           | FredPret wrote:
           | The thing is though this is good for shareholders only in the
           | very short term. In the decades-plus term, doing the right
           | thing is best for the owners.
           | 
           | And this is why we need savvy shareholders who vote in AGMs.
        
         | rjbwork wrote:
         | Efficient systems are brittle systems. You wring all the slack
         | out of it and any shock is going to cause failure. In this
         | case, the slack is the nurses and other healthcare workers'
         | mental health and burnout limits and pay and culture etc. etc.
         | The slack is being pulled to lower costs and increase
         | insurance/hospital profits.
         | 
         | It's unsurprising that what has happened in the past couple of
         | years is putting stress on a system with the slack pulled out
         | of it.
        
           | TrispusAttucks wrote:
           | You're spot on. This pattern is emerging across many
           | structures. Efficiency is inverse correlated with resiliency.
           | JIT systems have spread over the globe but they don't handle
           | shocks in the pipeline very well.
        
             | etchalon wrote:
             | "Efficiency is inverse correlated with resiliency.".
             | 
             | Well, I'm jotting that down in a notebook.
        
               | TrispusAttucks wrote:
               | You may enjoy the paper "Examining the balance between
               | efficiency and resilience in closed-loop supply chains"
               | [1] from August 2021.
               | 
               | EDIT: Also interesting relationship with sustainability
               | [2].
               | 
               | [1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10100-021-
               | 00766-1
               | 
               | [2] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Sustainability-
               | curve-map...
        
       | say_it_as_it_is wrote:
       | This isn't a problem that can be solved by an IT solution. Nurses
       | have more patients assigned to them than what they can manage.
       | They don't need another system of forms and workflows to fill out
       | in addition to their overloaded plate. If anything, the solution
       | is the opposite of an IT solution in that hospitals must hire
       | more nurses and stop following the recommended lean-management
       | staffing numbers provided by software.
        
       | acchow wrote:
       | As nurses quit, nurse compensation will increase and the number
       | considering leaving will start to fall
        
       | tyrrvk wrote:
       | We talk about insurance killing the medical field, but I'd also
       | argue that EMR companies are doing a number on the profession as
       | well. Have you seen the Epic campus? Epic - located in Wisconsin
       | (not the gaming company). The amount of overhead a hospital needs
       | to support/run that behemoth can't be small. And Epic is
       | _swimming_ in cash.
        
       | vlunkr wrote:
       | I'd like to know what "considering leaving" means in this study.
       | I consider leaving my profession every time a React hook
       | misbehaves and locks up my browser, but I'm not actually going to
       | leave. 90% seems way too high to be people who are actively
       | wanting to leave.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | cupofpython wrote:
         | > 90% seems way too high to be people who are actively wanting
         | to leave
         | 
         | We are talking about the people who clean up the nastiest human
         | waste that our bodies are capable of producing. I was already
         | surprised that this number was ever less than 100% tbh
        
           | lbebber wrote:
           | A friend of mine was (is?) completely unfazed by this sort of
           | thing--right from the start, it was not some resistance built
           | up over time.
           | 
           | She left the profession due to the long hours, low pay, and
           | poor treatment.
        
           | vlunkr wrote:
           | Well they knew that going in, so I'm not convinced that's a
           | factor.
        
             | ejb999 wrote:
             | right, and while nurses do have to do some things I would
             | consider gross, more often than not, it is the lower paid
             | medical assistants and CNA's that get the real awful jobs
             | that does not require a nursing degree - i.e. changing
             | diapers in nursing home, bathing people etc - won't find
             | too many nurses doing that in the nursing homes around me.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | ejb999 wrote:
           | Yes, but that is what they signed up for - i.e. they knew it
           | going in, and that has not all of a sudden changed.
           | 
           | I couldn't do it, and god bless them, but that is unlikely a
           | cause of people leaving the profession - that would be like a
           | computer programmer saying they were leaving the profession
           | because they suddenly found out they have to stare at a
           | screen most of the day.
           | 
           | I also find that '90%' number suspect as someone that works
           | very closely with the healthcare community - there is a lot
           | of turnover, and its hard to hire nurses right now - but
           | almost always when someone leaves their job it is because
           | they went down the street and got a 25% raise, i.e. they
           | didn't leave their profession, just their job.
        
         | supertrope wrote:
         | Stated and revealed preferences are very different.
        
         | makeitdouble wrote:
         | 90% leaving might be too high, but even of a tenth actually
         | manages to move on it will have a huge impact.
         | 
         | More importantly, a lot of them will be leaving though burnout
         | and depression (a significant number of hospital staff is
         | already on this course).
        
       | mulmen wrote:
       | I did IT support in a hospital for a year. Nurses do everything.
       | Their job is both _hard_ and _thankless_. I do not doubt
       | satisfaction is low.
       | 
       | But this sounds like the employee satisfaction corollary to
       | Sturgeon's Law [1].
       | 
       | "90% of _employed people_ are considering leaving their
       | profession in the next year."
       | 
       | This survey would be more compelling if it compared nurses
       | responses with the general employed population over time. I only
       | skimmed so maybe it does and I missed it.
       | 
       | [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law
        
       | timcavel wrote:
        
       | T3RMINATED wrote:
        
       | slantedview wrote:
       | It would be interesting to see data on this by state. Nursing,
       | unfortunately, is much more difficult in states without unions.
       | In California, the strong nurses union has ensured somewhat
       | better staffing ratios and much better pay than in other states.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | weatherlite wrote:
       | Hard profession but one of the last things to be automated imo,
       | guaranteed income for next 30-40 years. Don't think you can say
       | the same about certain types of doctors for instance.
        
         | xhkkffbf wrote:
         | A friend who is an anesthesiologist said that he was retiring
         | because the new machines were so good that no one wanted to pay
         | for an anesthesiologist anymore. They were happy with a nurse.
         | So you're right.
        
           | weatherlite wrote:
           | It is very algorithmic in nature afaik, so quite easy to
           | automate. As is oncology, radiology and many aspects of
           | family medicine. It won't be tomorrow, but 10-20 years from
           | now I think is very realistic for huge changes. Brave new
           | world...
        
           | theguyovrthere wrote:
           | CRNA != Nurse in the same sense as a registered nurse in an
           | ICU or med-surge department.
           | 
           | CRNA is the Nurse Practitioner version of Anesthesiologists.
           | 
           | They're paying for less anesthesiologists and hiring more
           | Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist because they're
           | cheaper, perform a sweeping majority of the same function,
           | and multiple can be supervised by an anesthesiologist who is
           | on hand to fill the small gap between theirs and the CRNA
           | scope of practice.
        
           | biohax2015 wrote:
           | There are tons of openings for anesthesiologists paying
           | 400k+.
           | https://www.gaswork.com/search/Anesthesiologist/Job/All
        
             | weatherlite wrote:
             | That's quite pricey, sounds like a good candidate for
             | automation :)
        
         | mbg721 wrote:
         | Nursing won't be automated soon, but automated systems will be
         | used for things that nurses used to do (with predictably worse
         | results).
        
           | lghh wrote:
           | Nurses do a lot of menial tasks that they are overqualified
           | for. Could those not be freed up by automation so that nurses
           | can do the high-skill tasks they are uniquely qualified to
           | do?
           | 
           | I think you're right in the sense that I expect we won't
           | shoot to automate the menial tasks first, and instead will
           | let our hubris guide us to automate the high-skill tasks. But
           | speaking optimistically, there's a lot of productive
           | automation that can happen. Heck, a lot of it has already
           | happened via digital record keeping.
        
             | weatherlite wrote:
             | But much of those menial tasks are quite difficult to
             | automate - changing IVs, bed sheets, patient clothes,
             | bandages, diapers etc etc...I don't think AI/robotics is
             | anywhere close. However, it is possible that much of the
             | menial work will be delegated to lower paid "nurse aides"
             | that don't really need much medical knowledge , while the
             | real therapeutic work start being automated by machines and
             | algorithms. Thus salaries will be squeezed downwards, which
             | in the end is what the system wants obviously.
        
       | quxbar wrote:
       | The market will surely adjust, by killing off people who can no
       | longer afford nursing.
        
         | plaguepilled wrote:
         | I'd laugh, but I have this sinking feeling you're right...
        
       | ashitlerferad wrote:
       | Salaries about to go through the roof. Time to be a nurse more
       | than ever.
        
       | petermcneeley wrote:
       | Most people work for money so I would take all this with a grain
       | of salt. If you are a RN what are you going to do if not nursing?
       | The same applies to all fields including Physicians.
        
         | chrisseaton wrote:
         | > If you are a RN what are you going to do if not nursing?
         | 
         | You can do almost any job with almost any degree.
        
           | notch656a wrote:
           | Being able to do it doesn't mean someone will hire you.
           | Almost anyone may be able to become an engineer but you
           | hardly have a prayer of being hired for a well compensated
           | and benefited role unless you have years of experience or a
           | (science or engineering) degree combined with internship(s).
        
         | shadowofneptune wrote:
         | Both physicians and nurses have a lot of options beyond working
         | at a hospital. Private practice, small clinics, education,
         | consulting, etc. People who will be leaving in these next few
         | years won't necessarily be retiring.
        
         | shadowgovt wrote:
         | One interesting thing to spot-check in this study would be
         | geographic distribution.
         | 
         | Salary for nurses varies widely, and in some places, they're
         | wage-competitive with Amazon delivery drivers now. I can easily
         | see people deciding that even though they like helping folks,
         | getting paid less than the people who drive around and drop
         | packages all day doesn't seem like a fair deal.
        
         | ranci wrote:
         | Typically nurses are women. Typically women are married to men.
         | Men worthy of a relationship or marriage to begin with
         | typically have an income significantly higher than min wage,
         | potentially capable of sustaining a family on his own. Nurses
         | are women usually and women have options, usually.
        
           | mrtranscendence wrote:
           | This comment is kooky. Are you implying that one option for
           | women nurses is marrying a higher-income man and becoming a
           | stay-at-home spouse?
           | 
           | Men making less than the median for their gender (something
           | like $55k in the US) are still marriageable; plenty of women
           | marry men who can't support families on their salary alone.
           | Even at the median salary, supporting two people -- let alone
           | a larger family -- could be a struggle, depending on debts
           | and other commitments.
           | 
           | And then there are women who are not married to a man who
           | makes money, either because they remain unmarried or because
           | their husband has lost his job or cannot work for some
           | reason.
           | 
           | Further, even if the cards align, it's not great to be in a
           | position of dependence on your spouse's salary. Sometimes you
           | have to split up and sometimes your spouse dies without
           | leaving significant insurance or inheritance.
        
             | bhandziuk wrote:
             | I think they're saying that married people might have a
             | little more leeway in changing careers because they have
             | the stability of a second income in their household
             | already.
        
         | n8cpdx wrote:
         | There's a huge labor shortage, they could do just about
         | anything and get a pretty sizable bonus to sign up. I've heard
         | $20k bonus for trucking, local transit agency is offering 7.5k
         | to sign up as a bus driver, police nationwide are desperate and
         | the requirements for the local agency consist of any 2 year
         | degree + being willing to be drug tested, construction industry
         | is trying to recruit women now, etc.
        
           | mrtranscendence wrote:
           | I'm not a nurse, so grain of salt and all that, but I think
           | I'd rather be a nurse than any of those things. And except
           | for (some) trucking, RNs generally get paid more than all of
           | them, I think.
           | 
           | There's a lot of white collar work that only requires a
           | nonspecific college degree, but I'm not aware of such a high
           | demand for for HR staff or accounts payable specialists.
        
           | notch656a wrote:
           | Probably true in certain areas, but nurses are unique in that
           | they occupy one of the few high-wage jobs in rural areas.
           | Nurses, on average, are probably more likely to be in places
           | where it is difficult to find alternative jobs of equal pay.
           | 
           | If you're a typical white-collar professional in say some
           | business/science/engineering field you'll typically, unlike
           | nurses, live somewhere with abundant other high wage jobs.
        
         | ModernMech wrote:
         | Whether or not any particular nurse follows through with
         | thoughts of quitting, all else being equal I think we want
         | nurses who enjoy and want to stay being nurses rather than
         | nurses who are thinking about quitting. Nurses who are happy
         | provide better care than nurses who are so unhappy they want to
         | quit.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-04-27 23:00 UTC)