Appalling "solution" to nursing shortage

[Jolt]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/25/wo...ef=global-home

I hope this idea never comes to the USA...free boob jobs to get nurses to come work for your clinic? The sad thing is that it has actually worked!!!

[lph]

That is one of the most bizarre news stories I have ever read.

[Mr. Bloom]

While I will acknowledge that this is a strange approach - as opposed to simply giving them an equivalent pay raise - I am curious to understand why this is so appalling.

They are:

• choosing this from a range of options - would you feel the same way about braces to straighten their teeth?
• doing this with free will
• doing this in consistency with their own cultural attitudes - which we shouldn't be second guessing...
• apparently feel better about themselves because of it, and
• even offering the same options to men, or so it appears

I would love the opportunity to get a hair transplant if it were offered to me as a perq, but it's not something that I'd pay for to feed my own vanity...

Silver is very open about having gotten implants (even over my resistance and objection) after losing 1/3 of her body weight in training. Is that an appalling act when it had the equivalent effect of reconstructive surgery to a breast cancer survivor?

Jolt: I understand that you find this appalling and I respect that fact. But for reasons I've noted, I don't understand and welcome your insight and perspective on why

[lph]

Since I agree with Jolt's reaction I'll butt in and answer too: I find it appalling because it normalizes the idea that cosmetic surgery is something that everybody should want, and have if they could afford it. I am strongly against the idea that it's ok to operate on anything you're not 100 % happy with. I am NOT moralizing against everybody who has cosmetic surgery, as there are plenty of good reasons to do so, but I think the focus on physical beauty is way too high in the first place, and surgery is not something to be offered as a simple perk. I would be happier if they offered beauty or spa treatments at a local salon, and even happier if the perk was membership at a local gym.

We - both women and men - do not need more people telling us, however indirectly, that we should look better on the outside. Especially not employers implying that their female employees should be sexier.

[shootingstar]

There is a nursing shortage here in Canuckland. Of course there is doctor shortage also...in certain parts of Canada where doctors don't want to relocate to.

I haven't taken time to read the NY Times article. But bonus incentives for housing, gift cards for groceries, daily transportation subsidies or for continuing education courses for ongoing skill upgrading are far more practical options.

[Crankin]

I agree that this is a rather strange approach to solve this problem, but just saying this negates the cultural perspective. In some countries, a lot of women (and men) have cosmetic surgery. In my last job, I had many students from Brazil; quite frequently, their parents would go back, for medical care, including what we would consider to be frivolous cosmetic surgery. This included people from many walks of life, in many professions.
While I would rather see increased salary, etc., this does not really upset me.

I tend to agree with Mr. S. We can't be the PC police for everyone.
I really wanted to get implants when I was in my 30s and I am not embarrassed to say so. I was very thin from teaching aerobics 5 days a week and my already miniscule chest was even smaller. I couldn't afford it, and believe me, that was all that stopped me. If someone had offered it to me as a perk, I am pretty sure I would have taken the offer. This was only to please myself, and to be able to fit into clothing properly.

[OakLeaf]

The thing that Americans need to remember about that story (which didn't immediately pop into my head) is that even though the Czech Republic no longer has single-payer, there is still a clear distinction there and in the rest of the developed world between medically necessary and non-medically necessary surgery. If this were in the USA - IOW, if the hospital were offering employees free breast augmentation while at the same time turning away patients who couldn't afford cancer surgery or angioplasty - that would be a very different situation, IMO.

[Jolt]

While I will acknowledge that this is a strange approach - as opposed to simply giving them an equivalent pay raise - I am curious to understand why this is so appalling.

They are:

• choosing this from a range of options - would you feel the same way about braces to straighten their teeth?
• doing this with free will
• doing this in consistency with their own cultural attitudes - which we shouldn't be second guessing...
• apparently feel better about themselves because of it, and
• even offering the same options to men, or so it appears

I would love the opportunity to get a hair transplant if it were offered to me as a perq, but it's not something that I'd pay for to feed my own vanity...

Silver is very open about having gotten implants (even over my resistance and objection) after losing 1/3 of her body weight in training. Is that an appalling act when it had the equivalent effect of reconstructive surgery to a breast cancer survivor?

Jolt: I understand that you find this appalling and I respect that fact. But for reasons I've noted, I don't understand and welcome your insight and perspective on why

Basically my reaction was because, as lph said, there should not be such an emphasis on appearance/pressure to look a certain way. Especially if it would require surgery that is not needed and has risks like any other surgery. I don't feel this should be encouraged (for either gender), which is exactly what these "perks" are doing. Re: your comparison to braces to straighten the teeth, I feel that is a little different because in the case of braces there is a health issue (it's harder to thoroughly clean teeth that are crooked/crowded together) in addition to the cosmetic issue. Sort of analogous to reconstructive as opposed to cosmetic plastic surgery. The part of the article that mentioned appearance as being placed on the same level of importance as clinical skills, and the one nurse's experience of being asked to walk "as if on a catwalk" in a job interview(!), really disturbed me. What does that have to do with providing high-quality care?? That just seems wrong to me (looking at it from my cultural point of view in the US) on so many levels. Nurses should appear well-groomed and professional, but beyond that there should not be standards for how a nurse looks. Also, there are SO many healthier and more practical perks that could be given, like public transportation passes, discounts on housing near the hospital/clinic, food/gas gift cards, gym memberships (which can help a person look better in addition to the health benefits), free massages, or just plain raising the overall salaries.

[Chicken Little]

I'm a nurse.
There is no boob job in the world that will help you when somebody is throwing up on you, pooping on your shoe, or so drunk they are trying to kick you in the head.

[Jolt]

I'm a nurse.
There is no boob job in the world that will help you when somebody is throwing up on you, pooping on your shoe, or so drunk they are trying to kick you in the head.

Funny, and so true! I'm a nurse as well.

[tctrek]

I don't know.. I actually think they looked for the perks that would work to get them to their goal of more nurses. I don't think the perks were directed at making nurses look better, rather that they probably did some research and figured out that the plastic surgery perks were the ones that they would be the most successful at getting the nurses to buy-in. I'm sure they used other enticements in the past (ie: benefits, parking spots, clothing allowances) that didn't get the desired result.

[PamNY]

I used to be moralistic about this sort of thing but I got over it. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of cosmetic surgery, but we humans have been altering our physical appearances one way or another throughout history. That's just the way we are.

Pam

[Jolt]

I don't know.. I actually think they looked for the perks that would work to get them to their goal of more nurses. I don't think the perks were directed at making nurses look better, rather that they probably did some research and figured out that the plastic surgery perks were the ones that they would be the most successful at getting the nurses to buy-in. I'm sure they used other enticements in the past (ie: benefits, parking spots, clothing allowances) that didn't get the desired result.

That's a good point; they wouldn't have offered it if they didn't think it was going to get them more nurses! It's just sad that this kind of thing works better than the more practical incentives IMHO.

[Aquila]

I wonder if the "markup" on cosmetic surgery is really high, compared to the actual cost? (What I mean is, say it costs $100 to do it, but you usually charge $500. Totally made up numbers, as you can probably tell.) If so, it's probably a way cheaper alternative than something where they'd have to pay "retail" for another benefit. They can say, look, here's a $500. benefit, but the actual cost to them is only $100.

Besides, if it's a place that does much cosmetic surgery, then they probably do want to normalize such surgery and make it seem as commonplace and necessary as possible.

My workplace could offer me a free bike cleaning with more success, though.

[Mr. Bloom]

Aquila: I do believe your perspective may offer some insight into the motivation from the employer perspective.

Overall, I think we'll all agree that there are very strange consequences of this policy/program:
- an influence of "appearance" on perceived quality of care
- a need to staff the cosmetic surgery procedures further exacerabating the staffing problem

But, at the risk of creating a tangent, it's kind of like the "Wal Mart Debate"...does "Wal Mart" put local grocers out of business? No, it's the people who demand what Walmart offers...who then stop shopping at the local stores.

IMHO, It's the same here: if there's fault, it's not in the "offering" (by the providers), it's in the "wanting" (by the consumers who represent a potential employment pool). But, on sum, I'm not appalled unless it affects the availability and quality of care.