Nurse Sanctioned for Adopting Former Patient’s Baby

[alphaholic06]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Thoughts?

Nurse who adopted patient's baby is sanctioned by the state • Iowa Capital Dispatch

An Iowa nurse who adopted the baby of a former patient has been sanctioned for her actions by state regulators.

iowacapitaldispatch.com

 

[GonnaBeADoc2222]

If the birth mother truly wasn't coerced into this and it went down like the RN says it did....why should anyone care??

 

[JacobMcCandles]

This should be pretty easy to prove by the RN if everything went how she said.

Besides, the baby appears to have landed in a loving home so good for him. Maybe the nursing board should spend more time sanctioning sh***y and lazy nurses.

 

[bravotwozero]

This should be pretty easy to prove by the RN if everything went how she said.

Besides, the baby appears to have landed in a loving home so good for him. Maybe the nursing board should spend more time sanctioning sh***y and lazy nurses.

And PLPs, don’t forget them.

 

[Tenk]

In the article it says they dropped the charges and she just had to take some stupid classes.

Someone prolly reported her without the full picture and the board just did this to save face. Seems normal.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

And PLPs, don’t forget them.

Nursing boards, usually run by RNs, "regulate" nurse practitioners.

There was a case a few years back when a NP did egregious things but wasn't sanctioned by the nursing board because the RNs on the board didn't have the "expertise" to say whether the "medicine" practiced by the NP was standard of care or not.

Meanwhile PA practice is regulated by the same state boards of medicine as you.

 

[RustedFox]

Nursing boards, usually run by RNs, "regulate" nurse practitioners.

There was a case a few years back when a NP did egregious things but wasn't sanctioned by the nursing board because the RNs on the board didn't have the "expertise" to say whether the "medicine" practiced by the NP was standard of care or not.

Meanwhile PA practice is regulated by the same state boards of medicine as you.

Bro, both you and we all know that you're not a pretender. You actually know the medicine.

 

[Birdstrike]

One thing I’m sure I’ll never do is adopt a former patient’s baby.

 

[miacomet]

As someone who works in the adoptee rights movement, this is a huge violation of the patient-physician relationship. I know it's hard to understand for those who don't do this kind of work, but just as a sexual relationship between a nurse and patient is not OK, this is also a violation of boundaries even if both consent.

Also, be careful, adoptees and bios deal with a lot of insults. Be sure to be kind.

 

[WilcoWorld]

I agree with the above 2 posters. Sure, the nurse's side of the story sounds harmless, sweet even. But there are certain things to which opening the door invites so many fraught situations that the benefits of opening the door just can't warrant the risk.

I would put allowing L&D nurses to adopt their patients' babies on that list.

The article says the mother and the nurse connected on Facebook. I would also put connecting with my patients on social media on my list of doors I'll just keep closed.

 

[Franzd'Epinay]

As someone who works in the adoptee rights movement, this is a huge violation of the patient-physician relationship. I know it's hard to understand for those who don't do this kind of work, but just as a sexual relationship between a nurse and patient is not OK, this is also a violation of boundaries even if both consent.

Also, be careful, adoptees and bios deal with a lot of insults. Be sure to be kind.

Please elaborate. I don't see your point of view but am open to hearing more about it.

If you're drawing a comparison to physician romantic relationships, the L&D nurse scenario seems to me much closer to "patient dates doctor who refilled her albuterol at the urgent care once" than "patient dates her current psychiatrist of 10 years".

 

[WilcoWorld]

Please elaborate. I don't see your point of view but am open to hearing more about it.

If you're drawing a comparison to physician romantic relationships, the L&D nurse scenario seems to me much closer to "patient dates doctor who refilled her albuterol at the urgent care once" than "patient dates her current psychiatrist of 10 years".

I think that L&D nurses interact with mothers at an incredibly psychologically vulnerable point in their lives. Childbearing is worlds different from asthma treatment, IMO.

 

[Franzd'Epinay]

I think that L&D nurses interact with mothers at an incredibly psychologically vulnerable point in their lives. Childbearing is worlds different from asthma treatment, IMO.

Right, obviously this is a continuum, which is why I said "closer" in relation to two extreme examples. I would also conversely say that this is worlds different from a decade-long psychiatrist-patient relationship.

The nature of an L&D Nurse-patient relationship (no medical-decision-making authority, no continuity of care, almost always < 12 hrs by definition) just does not, to me, raise the same absolute red flags that other relationships would. This is not to say that it should raise no eyebrows, just that there is room for nuance there which I felt was not being afforded to the nurse in question ("this is also a violation of boundaries even if both consent").

 

[dpmd]

The appearance of impropriety is problematic and I can see no way for this to go down that wouldn't provide that appearance. Doesn't mean it was done in an improper way but a laboring mother is in a delicate position that the nurse caring for her can absolutely take advantage of and therefore every effort should be made to avoid the appearance that they did. If it went down exactly as the nurse contends it did she should have set the patient up with resources for adoption rather than taking the child herself.

 

[DeadCactus]

"Simon said the mother was in the United States on a visa and attending school. The woman risked deportation if she dropped out, Simon said, but was also having a difficult time caring for the child while attending school and living in a dormitory."
So the pessimistic take on this would be a woman had to give up her baby to get an education and avoid deportation while a nurse used her position of privilege to take that baby.

"Simon said the decision to adopt wasn’t made lightly and cost $25,000."
Ignore the benevolence that comes with the word "adoption" and just look at the actual transaction that happened here. Just think for a moment how far $25k and all the time they are spending now raising a child would have gone in just helping support the Mom. I'm sure many adoptive and foster parents have great intentions but intentions don't negate systemic failures.

I don't know the details of this specific case so that might be a dramatic interpretation for this case. I would, however, stand by an argument that our adoption and foster systems have historically preferred to spend money taking children away from disadvantaged people than to give them the resources they need to take care of children.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

people than to give them the resources they need to take care of children

These United States have a robust social safety network with many resources for parents in poverty: housing, Healthcare, food stamps, WIC, child tax "credits", earned income "credits", Pell grants, etc.

 

[wareagle726]

"Simon said the mother was in the United States on a visa and attending school. The woman risked deportation if she dropped out, Simon said, but was also having a difficult time caring for the child while attending school and living in a dormitory."


"Simon said the decision to adopt wasn’t made lightly and cost $25,000."

All I could think about was "Simon says touch your nose"