Should states mandate nurse staffing ratios?

Greenbeard · Sep 25, 2018

Here's a real world case. In a few weeks, voters in Massachusetts will vote on whether to mandate staffing levels for nurses (i.e., set a maximum number of patients that can be assigned to nurses). A new poll today shows public opinion on the question is tied at 44%-44% with 12% undecided.

Politically it's largely a fight between nursing unions (who argue for the ratios on patient safety and quality grounds) and hospitals (who oppose the initiative largely for pragmatic and financial reasons).

So how would you vote?

WBUR Poll: Ballot Question About Mass. Nurse Staffing Is A Dead Heat

With no independent, scientific polling of nurses, the tug-of-war over their collective position is hard to referee. But the "yes" camp is led by the Massachusetts Nurses Association, the state's largest nurses' union, which says its own survey of nurses shows strong support for tight staffing requirements.

Hospitals lead the "no" side, arguing that caps on the numbers of patients assigned to nurses will cost about $1 billion per year. The American Nurses Association of Massachusetts, a trade group, also opposes the measure.

Ballotpedia has more.

What would Question 1 do?

Question 1 was designed to establish patient assignment limits for registered nurses working in hospitals. Limits would be determined by the type of medical unit or patient with whom a nurse is working, and the maximum numbers of patients assigned determined by the limits would apply at all times. The measure would require these patient limits to be met without reducing staff levels, such as service staff, maintenance staff, or clerical staff. The enforcement of the measure would be suspended during a public health emergency as declared by the state or nationally.

What are the arguments for and against nurse-patient limits?

Those who support the measure argue that limits on how many patients a nurse can be assigned to will allow nurses to spend more time with patients and therefore reduce mistakes and readmissions.[1]

Those who oppose the measure argue that enforcing limits on nurse-patient assignments will increase patient wait times and force hospitals to cut back on services. They also argue it would be too expensive for hospitals to hire more nurses, resulting in hospitals closing down.[2]

Moderate Right · Sep 25, 2018

Greenbeard said:
Here's a real world case. In a few weeks, voters in Massachusetts will vote on whether to mandate staffing levels for nurses (i.e., set a maximum number of patients that can be assigned to nurses). A new poll today shows public opinion on the question is tied at 44%-44% with 12% undecided.

Politically it's largely a fight between nursing unions (who argue for the ratios on patient safety and quality grounds) and hospitals (who oppose the initiative largely for pragmatic and financial reasons).

So how would you vote?

WBUR Poll: Ballot Question About Mass. Nurse Staffing Is A Dead Heat

Ballotpedia has more.

Yet another case of liberals thinking that they can stick it to big businesses and suffer no consequences. If this passes, healthcare prices will go up, plain and simple. If that's what the people want then they should vote yes but to think big business will just eat the extra labor is typical liberal naivety.

Grand Mal · Sep 25, 2018

Moderate Right said:
Yet another case of liberals thinking that they can stick it to big businesses and suffer no consequences. If this passes, healthcare prices will go up, plain and simple. If that's what the people want then they should vote yes but to think big business will just eat the extra labor is typical liberal naivety.

It's like class sizes. Do you think taxpayers should be able to dictate how many kids are in each classroom? I do.
And sometimes you just have to pay more for quality. Are you in America or some third-world ****hole?

Beaudreaux · Sep 25, 2018

Greenbeard said:
Here's a real world case. In a few weeks, voters in Massachusetts will vote on whether to mandate staffing levels for nurses (i.e., set a maximum number of patients that can be assigned to nurses). A new poll today shows public opinion on the question is tied at 44%-44% with 12% undecided.

Politically it's largely a fight between nursing unions (who argue for the ratios on patient safety and quality grounds) and hospitals (who oppose the initiative largely for pragmatic and financial reasons).

So how would you vote?

WBUR Poll: Ballot Question About Mass. Nurse Staffing Is A Dead Heat

Ballotpedia has more.

That's one of the great things about our country. The US Constitution gives most of the power and authority to the people and the several states.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis put it very well in New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann he stated that a "state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country."

So should they? Who knows. That is to be determined by the impact and results of whatever they choose to do, which is what is meant by the term "Laboratory of democracy."

Can they? Sure, if their citizens choose to allow it.

This is also why everyone gets it completely wrong when they try to compare "RomneyCare" (a state law impacting only the citizens of that state) to "ObamaCare" (a federal mandate impacting everyone).

Beaudreaux · Sep 25, 2018

Grand Mal said:
It's like class sizes. Do you think taxpayers should be able to dictate how many kids are in each classroom? I do.
And sometimes you just have to pay more for quality. Are you in America or some third-world ****hole?

The US Constitution allows such actions on a state level, which is where classroom size is also controlled, but does not provide such power to the federal government. Which I presume means some states could be third-world ****holes in your view, and others may not be -

.

Skeptic Bob · Sep 25, 2018

It seems reasonable if it only applies to public hospitals. I don’t think it should apply to private hospitals, if such a thing exists in Massachusetts.

Kal'Stang · Sep 25, 2018

Greenbeard said:
Here's a real world case. In a few weeks, voters in Massachusetts will vote on whether to mandate staffing levels for nurses (i.e., set a maximum number of patients that can be assigned to nurses). A new poll today shows public opinion on the question is tied at 44%-44% with 12% undecided.

Politically it's largely a fight between nursing unions (who argue for the ratios on patient safety and quality grounds) and hospitals (who oppose the initiative largely for pragmatic and financial reasons).

So how would you vote?

WBUR Poll: Ballot Question About Mass. Nurse Staffing Is A Dead Heat

Ballotpedia has more.

I voted yes. It really is equivalent to class sizes. The bigger the class the harder it is for even the best of teachers to properly teach the children. The more patients a nurse has the harder it is for them to give proper life saving care. And for me, both are just as equally important and money should be no object when it comes to either one.

Mycroft · Sep 25, 2018

Greenbeard said:
Here's a real world case. In a few weeks, voters in Massachusetts will vote on whether to mandate staffing levels for nurses (i.e., set a maximum number of patients that can be assigned to nurses). A new poll today shows public opinion on the question is tied at 44%-44% with 12% undecided.

Politically it's largely a fight between nursing unions (who argue for the ratios on patient safety and quality grounds) and hospitals (who oppose the initiative largely for pragmatic and financial reasons).

So how would you vote?

WBUR Poll: Ballot Question About Mass. Nurse Staffing Is A Dead Heat

Ballotpedia has more.

Without even looking at the arguments for or against, I come down on the side of getting the government out of the business of private businesses. Let the hospitals decide. If they screw up people won't go to their hospital and they'll lose money. If they make the right decision, people will use their hospital and they'll make money.

The invisible hand works, folks.

MrWonka · Sep 25, 2018

Moderate Right said:
Yet another case of liberals thinking that they can stick it to big businesses and suffer no consequences. If this passes, healthcare prices will go up,

Nope, we are fully aware of the consequences we just recognize the reality that you get what you pay for, and we shouldn't be trying to cut corners and save money at the expense of people's lives.

MrWonka · Sep 25, 2018

Mycroft said:
If they screw up people won't go to their hospital

Do you even listen to yourself? If they screw up people will be dead. They won't have an opportunity to realize they should have gone somewhere else.

Furthermore, when you're dying and Ambulance takes you to the nearest hospital. It doesn't drive you all the way across town because the hospital over there has a better yelp review.

Furthermore, this ignores the possibility that every hospital skimping on costs in the same way in order to keep costs down and attract patients means that there exist no hospitals that are appropriately staffed. Go learn what a Nash Equilibrium is and quit wasting our time with garbage about invisible hands.

Mycroft · Sep 25, 2018

MrWonka said:
Do you even listen to yourself? If they screw up people will be dead. They won't have an opportunity to realize they should have gone somewhere else.

Furthermore, when you're dying and Ambulance takes you to the nearest hospital. It doesn't drive you all the way across town because the hospital over there has a better yelp review.

Furthermore, this ignores the possibility that every hospital skimping on costs in the same way in order to keep costs down and attract patients means that there exist no hospitals that are appropriately staffed. Go learn what a Nash Equilibrium is and quit wasting our time with garbage about invisible hands.

If you are dying, you'd better hope the hospital has enough doctors...not nurses.

What do you think nurses do in hospitals?

MrWonka · Sep 25, 2018

Mycroft said:
If you are dying, you'd better hope the hospital has enough doctors...not nurses.
What do you think nurses do in hospitals?

So basically you couldn't rebuttal a single solitary thing I said and you're trying to deflect and change the subject.

If you'd like the state to mandate Doctor quotas as well that's fine by me. That's a very big problem as well.

MrWonka · Sep 25, 2018

Skeptic Bob said:
It seems reasonable if it only applies to public hospitals. I don’t think it should apply to private hospitals, if such a thing exists in Massachusetts.

Right? And while we're at it we should only require vehicles driven by public employees to obey the speed limit. Private drivers should be able to go as fast as they want. Obviously who pays them determines their ability to drive at speed. </sarcasm>

Skeptic Bob · Sep 25, 2018

MrWonka said:
Right? And while we're at it we should only require vehicles driven by public employees to obey the speed limit. Private drivers should be able to go as fast as they want. Obviously who pays them determines their ability to drive at speed. </sarcasm>

If those private drivers are on a private road not mixing with public drivers and privately funded, like a race track, then I agree.

Gamewell45 · Sep 25, 2018

Moderate Right said:
Yet another case of liberals thinking that they can stick it to big businesses and suffer no consequences. If this passes, healthcare prices will go up, plain and simple. If that's what the people want then they should vote yes but to think big business will just eat the extra labor is typical liberal naivety.

I'd vote to support it. I think it's important to try to eliminate mistakes from occurring from nurses who are exhausted due to inadequate staffing. You get what you pay for in life and to me when it comes to your health there should be no compromise. Look at it this way; as an example; if you were going to have open heart surgery, wouldn't it make sense that the surgeon was well rested as opposed to being tired or exhausted?

Grand Mal · Sep 25, 2018

Beaudreaux said:
The US Constitution allows such actions on a state level, which is where classroom size is also controlled, but does not provide such power to the federal government. Which I presume means some states could be third-world ****holes in your view, and others may not be - .

Well, I wasn't trying to imply, I was trying to ridicule the atittude that some of the very things that separate us from the less-blessed places in the world shouldn't be funded by taxes. More taxes, if they're needed. If you don't fund things like education and health care, if you leave all that up to the individual, your whole society will start to suffer. If you look at any country that's considered a 'third-world ****hole', most of what makes it that way is the people don't have access to medical care and education.

SDET · Sep 25, 2018

Skeptic Bob said:
It seems reasonable if it only applies to public hospitals. I don’t think it should apply to private hospitals, if such a thing exists in Massachusetts.

Right now, the nurses themselves are the enforcers of adequate time to serve their patients. If an employer pressures a nurse to devote too little time to her patients, it's incumbent on the nurse to seek employment elsewhere before her license and career are put in jeopardy. I voted yes.

Mycroft · Sep 25, 2018

MrWonka said:
So basically you couldn't rebuttal a single solitary thing I said and you're trying to deflect and change the subject.

If you'd like the state to mandate Doctor quotas as well that's fine by me. That's a very big problem as well.

I didn't rebut your contention, I showed that your contention is irrelevant to the topic...which is about nurses.

SDET · Sep 25, 2018

Grand Mal said:
Well, I wasn't trying to imply, I was trying to ridicule the atittude that some of the very things that separate us from the less-blessed places in the world shouldn't be funded by taxes. More taxes, if they're needed. If you don't fund things like education and health care, if you leave all that up to the individual, your whole society will start to suffer. If you look at any country that's considered a 'third-world ****hole', most of what makes it that way is the people don't have access to medical care and education.

Horse feathers! I know quite a bit about Latin America. There are some very educated and competent people working and living in poverty. A corrupt government that sucks all the cash out of the economy can leave the healthy and well educated in economic misery.

Grand Mal · Sep 25, 2018

SDET said:
Horse feathers! I know quite a bit about Latin America. There are some very educated and competent people working and living in poverty. A corrupt government that sucks all the cash out of the economy can leave the healthy and well educated in economic misery.

And what percentage of the population is represented by the 'very educated and competent'? And why does the fact that they live in poverty refute anything I said?
Let's say Guatemala. Most people in the country live in dire poverty with no access to education or medical care and that's what makes Guatemala a third-world ****-hole. That the educated people live in poverty also just means that the problem is very stark indeed.

MrWonka · Sep 25, 2018

Skeptic Bob said:
If those private drivers are on a private road not mixing with public drivers and privately funded, like a race track, then I agree.

I see, so now we need to have two completely separate roads built between the same two destinations, taking up twice the space and using up twice the asphalt requiring twice the constructions crews to maintain them even though we could easily fit all cars on one road. And we have to do all of that just so that free market dip****s can drive whatever speed they want and kill themselves rather than just tolerate abiding by the speed limit that the majority of Americans agree to set for the one road?

The Mark · Sep 25, 2018

Skeptic Bob said:
It seems reasonable if it only applies to public hospitals. I don’t think it should apply to private hospitals, if such a thing exists in Massachusetts.

If the staffing was taken into account in malpractice lawsuits or some such that might have the same effect.

I know NOTHING about medical law and such.

MrWonka · Sep 25, 2018

Mycroft said:
I didn't rebut your contention,

Really? Even after two full posts you still haven't come up with a valid rebuttal to my original argument?

Mycroft said:
I showed that your contention is irrelevant to the topic...which is about nurses.

Umm... I was talking about nurses. You are the one who changed the subject and tried to make it about Doctors.

Mycroft · Sep 25, 2018

MrWonka said:
Really? Even after two full posts you still haven't come up with a valid rebuttal to my original argument?

Umm... I was talking about nurses. You are the one who changed the subject and tried to make it about Doctors.

Your point...about nurses...didn't apply to nurses. It applied to doctors.

Try a different point...that actually does apply to nurses.

Moving on...

Skeptic Bob · Sep 26, 2018

MrWonka said:
I see, so now we need to have two completely separate roads built between the same two destinations, taking up twice the space and using up twice the asphalt requiring twice the constructions crews to maintain them even though we could easily fit all cars on one road. And we have to do all of that just so that free market dip****s can drive whatever speed they want and kill themselves rather than just tolerate abiding by the speed limit that the majority of Americans agree to set for the one road?

I think you’re stretching the analogy past its utility at this point. We already have public roads and private roads. We already have public hospitals and private hospitals. Nothing new to build so there is no reason they can’t operate by different rules. Tax payers should have a say, via our elected representatives, how public hospitals are using the tax dollars. Private hospitals owe the tax payer no such thing.

Should states mandate nurse staffing ratios?

Should states mandate nurse staffing ratios?

Yes

No

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!

Preserve Protect Defend

Preserve Protect Defend

Genius is where you find it.

Genius is where you find it.

Member

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!

Genius is where you find it.

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!

Sporadic insanity normal.

Genius is where you find it.