Member
How Do You Identify?: queer
Preferred Pronoun?: They/Them & her/she
Relationship Status: Lucky, very lucky
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Portlandia, Oregon
Posts: 427
Thanks: 875
Thanked 1,286 Times in 315 Posts
Rep Power: 6505517
|
Gemme, you have a PM, per your request.
To the thread, I apologize for the derail.
Back on topic:
I have worked in the kind of jobs you just dont want to see an employee impaired with. And yet, I have seen things happen poorly, because of impairment from drugs we DO accept.
Ive seen patients get neglected due to nurses taking excessive smoke breaks.
Ive seen patients get unnecessarily poked repetitively by IV nurses who have had so much coffee their hands shake to much to get the needle in right.
Ive seen patients get snapped at because the nurse was tired from a sugar crash, or they are jonesing for the next cigg, or they have not had thier cup of coffee yet.
We certainly dont test for caffiene, nicotine, or even A1c levels for surgical doctors. But who wants a doc to be impatient with THEM during surgery, just because they need a cigg, or even a twinkie?
In my experience with these more mild responses is that the result was targeted - limits were put on breaks, education increased on patient right to be treated with dignity, ext and that this treated the problem the substance was causing, wich CAN be fixable. When the drug is socially acceptable, the problems are treated differently. The focus becomes the job performance, not the substance.
It just makes sense to me that less accepted drugs could be delt with in the same way.
|