Nearly two years ago, nurse Jessica Berger was unlocking the smoking room for
a patient when, suddenly, a green blanket came down over her eyes and she was
thrown to the ground.
She said she was "pounded for what seemed like a long time" and then she felt
his hands tighten around her neck. She thought she was going to die, and she
said she started praying. Fortunately for Berger, another patient--also a
resident of the psychiatric ward at a hospital in western
Massachusetts--threw the attacker off of Berger.
The 5-foot-1-inch woman said she was attacked while working the night shift
by someone who "knew what he was doing." But not everyone saw it her way.
Though she pressed charges against the patient, she said her boss told her
she had "gone off the deep end." In fact, she said hospital officials didn't
believe the incident took place, because the other two nurses who were
supposed to be on the floor with her at the time were on break or busy with
patients at the other end of the hall and didn't see what happened.
"This kind of thing never happened during the day shift because it's fully
staffed," said Berger, who would not reveal the name of the facility where
the attack occurred, but says she no longer works there. "I was alone in the
unit at the time."
Though psychiatric nurses log the highest rate of assaults, violence doesn't
just occur in mental health hospitals, nurses say. As a result, the
Canton-based Massachusetts Nurses Association (MNA) has pushed three bills
before the Legislature that aim to protect nurses from workplace violence.
One, known as the safe staffing bill, blames short-staffing for
patient-provoked assaults on nurses.
"Workers are frustrated, patients are frustrated, and that builds into
anger," said Evelyn Bain, occupational health and safety specialist for the
MNA.
Leslie Sullivan, chairwoman of the MNA's workplace violence task force and a
registered nurse on a psychiatric floor, said all the nurses on her
floor--except for two male nurses--have been assaulted at least once. But she
said the nurses are reluctant to press charges against their patients.
"It's so pervasive that even a nurse on a psych floor will say it's part of
her job," Sullivan said. "It's not part of her job, just like it's not part
of a marriage to get beaten by your husband."
William Keating, the district attorney for Norfolk County, said the courts
are guilty of the same mindset. In two recent cases that he knows of, a court
has prevented criminal complaints filed by nurses against abusive patients
from going forward, because the magistrate or clerk decided it was not a
crime, but part of the job.
"There was--and is--a lack of awareness in the court system, and the public,
concerning the violence against nurses," said Keating, who is scheduled to
discuss the issue of workplace violence at an MNA conference April 20. While
patients could defend themselves by saying they were medicated or under
stress, Keating said people have used the same defense in other situations.
The MNA-supported bills now on Beacon Hill would:
* Set mandatory staffing levels, to be decided by a newly created state
nursing commission, and to be enforced by the state Department of Public
Health.
* Establish a workplace violence program in every facility with five or
more employees. The bill would require facilities to implement an assaulted
staff action program that would provide counseling to employees.
* Create a comparable pension plan for health care workers as for public
employees who are considered at risk on the job, such as police officers and
firefighters.
A fourth bill would make it a felony to attack an emergency medical
technician or an emergency room nurse.
As of now, no groups have publicly opposed these bills. A spokeswoman for the
Burlington-based Massachusetts Hospital Association declined to comment.
Bain said it is only recently that nurses have spoken about the violence they
may encounter on the job.
The January/February cover story of RevolutioN
<http://www.revolutionmag.com>, an Oakland, Calif.-based nursing magazine,
features local nurse Corinne Solomon, who was assaulted by a patient while
working at Medfield State Hospital. According to the article, the patient
broke Solomon's left wrist in several places and aggravated a pre-existing
tumor, and surgery failed to correct the problem. An accompanying photo shows
how Solomon's left arm is much shorter than the right.
The article estimates that 9,000 nurses and health care workers are either
verbally or physically assaulted every day. The MNA is trying to make a case
that nurses should get the same state pension as police officers, because
health care workers are abused more often than police officers, Bain said,
citing a 1996 federal Justice Department survey.
Bain said there may be some resistance to the bill establishing workplace
violence programs because they cost hospitals money. However, she said a
workplace injury ends up costing the employer $33,000 in medical bills and
lost work time.
Nurses and the MNA are scheduled to rally at the Statehouse on March 8 to
corral support for their bills.
Copyright 2001 American City Business Journals Inc.
------------------------
TAKING BACK OUR PROFESSION
by Deb Rigiero, RN
cochair, Saint Vincent Hospital Bargaining Unit
vicepresident, MNA District 2
It is time we take back our profession! The historic date we do this will be
March 24, 2001, when the MNA votes to disaffiliate from the ANA.
When I say take back it implies that something was lost. I have been a
registered nurse for almost 19 years and I say we have lost important pieces
of our profession. Not only have we lost them but they have been given away.
Important parts of our profession have been given away by an ANA that is
projecting itself as the national voice of nurses. The ANA is not the voice
of the bedside nurse. They are a management-dominated organization who’s own
President is a nurse administrator of a San Francisco Hospital. How can the
ANA be the voice for both the bedside nurse and the healthcare corporation?
They can not. We are paying 1.2 million dollars a year to an organization
that is the voice of corporate healthcare packaged under the guise of a
national nurse’s voice.
If you read the latest edition of The American Nurse there was an article
discussing how to solve the nursing shortage. This article advocates to the
shifting of work away from the registered nurse and giving more training and
authority to unlicensed personnel. This would further remove the RN from the
bedside.
The bedside nurse is accountable for a work environment in which they have
little control. It is time for us to take control, to say NO to unsafe
staffing, dangerous work environments, and a lower standard of patient care.
It is time we leave the moderate path of the ANA and take the path of action!
The moderate path has given away our work and settled for a lower standard
of patient care. Now is the time to break free from the ball and chain of the
ANA! Now is the time when we need to unite with nurses with the same
standards and professional beliefs! Now is the time to take control of our
profession!
At the last MNA convention in November, an over whelming majority of 62%
voted to disaffiliate with the ANA. We needed 66%. We were 4% shy of freeing
ourselves from the ANA’s talons and gaining the true voice of nursing. Every
vote does count! We need you there so the minority does not dictate to the
majority. Join us at Mechanics Hall in Worcester at 1:00 PM, March 24, 2001
to take back our profession by voting to disaffiliate from the ANA.
------------------------
(Editor’s Note: MNA is divided into five geographic regions called districts.
District 5, encompassing Greater Boston and much of Eastern Massachusetts, is
the most populous. Its Board of Directors constitutes the focal point of
pro-ANA sentiment within Massachusetts. Following the changes effected at the
December 1st MNA Board meeting, it issued venomous and untrue letters to the
membership of District 5 and to the MNA Board of Directors, and expanded on
those false accusations in the January issue of District 5’s quarterly
newsletter Contact. These attacks formed part of the reason for the MNA’s
eventual decision to countersue, and they generated vigorous rebuttals,
primarily from leaders and members of the various collective bargaining units
within District 5, a sampling of which will be shared with readers of
Seachange Bulletin.)
January 12, 2001
Ms. Theresa A. Downey, Ph.D., RN, C.I.C.
President, District 5, MNA
57 Providence Highway
Norwood, MA 02062
Dear Ms. Downey and members of the District 5 Board of Directors:
As chairperson of the MNA Committee at the Brigham and Women's Hospital, I
represent the 2000 nurses covered under our collective bargaining agreement.
I write this letter on their behalf, and represent the views of a majority of
those nurses.
We were upset and outraged over your December 18, 2000 letter to the members
of District 5. The actions taken at the December meeting of the MNA board of
directors were legal and appropriate. There has been no derailment of our
professional organization. The new leaders who assumed office on December 1,
2000, did so following the voluntary resignation of their predecessors.
Furthermore, the MNA bylaws were strictly followed with regard to filling
vacant seats for officers and board members.
As one of the members of the Board of Directors who voted to continue efforts
to disaffiliate from the American Nurses Association, I did so at the request
of my constituents.
You, the officers and board members of District 5, have the responsibility to
respond to the directives of the constituents of District 5. It is my belief
that a majority of those members, including those at the Brigham and Women's
Hospital, are in support of the continued effort to disaffiliate from the
American Nurses Association.
Therefore, on behalf of the nurses at BWH, I respectfully request that the
District 5 Board of Directors work cooperatively with the MNA leadership in
support of efforts to disaffiliate. We have been continually disappointed in
ANA's failure to respond to the needs of staff nurses in this time of health
care turmoil. Furthermore, we believe that continuing our affiliation with
the ANA will threaten our collective bargaining rights, and create a
situation where bargaining units may face a decertification challenge.
The nurses within the BWH bargaining unit are in support of a special meeting
to reconsider the disaffiliation bylaw amendments, and believe that monies
spent by MNA toward that effort are appropriate and warranted.
The letters from District 5, containing harsh words and attacks aimed at the
MNA leadership, are not in keeping with the views and wishes of most District
5 members. These attacks must cease. Furthermore, the leaders of District 5
must stop using District funds to work against the wishes of the membership.
The vast majority of nurses within the district - nurses in bargaining units
- support an independent MNA. The District 5 leaders who represent those
nurses must also support an independent MNA.
Sincerely,
Barbara Norton, RN
Chairperson, MNA Bargaining Unit
Brigham & Women's Hospital
------------------------
Why Should We Disaffiliate from ANA?
The ANA Has Mismanaged Your Dues
Now They Want to Raise Them by $35
In the wake of years of financial mismanagement of member dues, the ANA (in
June) is proposing a significant increase in your dues, and you will have no
say about it. At a time when the majority of MNA members have voted to leave
ANA, continuing to finance their ineptitude is like putting new paint on a
rusted car.
Here are the facts:
* In 1998, the ANA commissioned a study of its finances by the Lang Group,
which reported that "ANA is in financial crisis ... because of many years of
poor financial leadership and inadequate long-range planning ... We uncovered
a plethora of uncertainties that ... make it impossible to determine the
accuracy of the 1999 budget."
* Without a significant increase in funds, the ANA is slated to go bankrupt
in two years.
* In response, ANA has slashed services to its members, including laying
off 18 staff members, and cutting off funding to membership groups, thereby
limiting members' involvement in the organization.
* At the ANA finance forum this past June, MNA delegates pleaded with the
treasurer to share the ANA Board's plan to address the budget crisis. The ANA
Board refused to share any such plan.
* The MNA pays dues of $1.2 million to the ANA each year ($85 per member).
Now, the ANA wants you, the members, to pay the price for their
mismanagement. In June, they are proposing a $35 dues increase ($25 in the
first year, and another $10 the next). Plus, they want an escalator clause,
which will increase dues every year thereafter.
* In addition to this increase, the ANA is negotiating an affiliation with
the AFL-CIO, which will result in yet another increase (this has yet to be
determined).
* Finally, you can expect yet another dues increase in the form of an
assessment by the United American Nurses, the ANA's national union. Remember,
the MNA is being forced into the UAN, which, because of its structure, puts
every MNA bargaining unit and every union contract at risk.
* At the MNA Business Meeting this past November, our membership voted
against a dues increase for union members.
If We Don't Disaffiliate, These Dues Increases Will Go
Into Effect And You Will Have No Vote Or Say About It.
Vote Yes for Disaffiliation on March 24th
Say No to an Increase in Your Dues
Say Yes to Investing in an Independent MNA
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has
not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making
such material available in an effort to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and
social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any
such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this
site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes. For more information go to:
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml>. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond
'fair use,’ you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.