Too posh to wash?

We might find the info we want on the RCN website

Orca I said in my first post that I felt what went on at Mid Staff hospital was totally unacceptable.

The the point I am making is that if the RCN do say that nurses should not be washing was patients, it is totally wrong. But I do not know what they said and you cannot point me to an original source it seems that neither of us really have a definitive answer about what the RCN actually said about this.
However as I really dislike dealing in speculation about such things so I want to see for myself where the RCN said or implied that washing patients is not important and not to rely on what might be hearsay or misinterpretation by any third party. I want to find this out before expressing an opinion on it.

I am sorry if you feel that wanting some evidence and accuracy on such statements is unreasonable or that it is nit picking.

There used to be State Enrolled Nurses, not as high a qualification as SRN. They were on the more practical side of nursing and have been replaced by the unqualified Health Care Assistants who are, presumably, cheaper to employ. Not that I have anything against HCAs who where a fixture on the ward where I had my replacements done and recognised me when I arrived back on the ward. I wouldn't be surprised if many of them would welcome the opportunity to qualify as SENs.

orca I am lost for words.

Now, jess and nellie - you clearly need everything spelling out in words of one syllable - how on earth have you been managing without orca to guide you
Oh, well, I suppose nurse-bashing is a change from teacher-bashing, both done usually by people who have never tried to do either.

Basic care includes cleaning up patients who had been unfortunate enough to be incontinent. I note your nit picking with interest and wonder at your lack of compassion for patients who are left to sit in their own excreta for hours. Basic care includes cleaning up such patients, basic care includes turning patients so bed sores do not cause them further suffering. This seems to be part of the training that the RCN is rejecting. In their attempt to give the nursing profession more status and a better career path, which I admit was long overdue, they have perhaps thrown out the baby with the bath water!! If nurses are no longer able or willing to carry out this basic care, and the RCN seem to be saying this by their reaction to the proposals, then they need to identity whose duty this is and enter into negotiation with the government to address the very real concerns of the public.
I'm sorry that you found my arguments difficult to follow Jess and Nellie I hope this explanation is simple clear enough for you to understand

Yes there is rather a lot of difference between the RCN disagreeing with the government over a 12 month pre-nursing requirement to work as an assistant and the "it seems.." statement. The government seem intent on undermining the public's view of both nurses and teachers at the moment. I suspect their motives.
Both professions are expected to do many things these days that were unheard of 40 years ago.

Orca I wasn't making a party line at all!
I was asking you where the RCN stated that they did not feel that washing patients was important.
From your comments it appears to me that this is the impression you got from the RCN statement.

"it seems the RCN think this (washing their patients) is beneath their members"

In the interests of accuracy I wanted to know where in their statement which expressed the RCNs concern about the new proposals for nursing training, they had stated or implied that washing patients is not important.

If you could give me a link to their statement in the same version of the article that you read, I would be able to evaluate that information myself but to do that I need to be able to see exactly the comments which led you to your conclusions.

Harrigran exactly. Staff shortages were only part of the problem in Stafford. Poor quality nursing played a significant part. I have witnessed some of this first hand.
Drop the party line please Nellie the excessive death rate at Stafford was during the Labour government's term of office.

Years ago we had the auxiliary nurses who weren't as highly qualified as the SRN's but were lovely people who thoroughly enjoyed looking after patients and making them comfortable.

Was that a good thing, harrigran. Hundreds of people died needlessly at the Staffordshire hospital, and some of the problems were caused by staff shortages.

Shortage of staff ? it was a daily occurrence, we just rolled our sleeves up and got on with it. No union when I started work.

orca harrigran sel
I do not really believe the premise that nurses consider themselves too posh to wash. Shortage of Staff is probably much more to the point.
When I was in hospital overnight last month the ward sister was complaining on the phone that she barely had enough qualified staff or care assistants to cover the shift. That was a ward where most of the people could manage self care.

Please can you enlighten me on where the RCN say that washing patients is not important.
As far as I can see their objections are to the idea that those wanting nursing training should have to spend a year as a health care assistant before starting on this.

The RCN seem to be complaining about the ideas the Government have dreamed up for reforms, when making their knee-jerk reactions to the rightful concerns about the Mid Staffs scandals. There it seems to be have been very poor management attitudes and staff supervision that led to these issues.

Have the government health ministers and advisers any actual idea about what happens in nursing training?

The RCN complaints are about the governments thoughtless pronouncements; as the Teachers are doing when they complain about the daft ideas of Michael Gove about rote learning etc.

It is the government subtly shifting the blame from the poor staffing issues to the individuals trying to work with too few staff.

PS I'm suggesting making it a 4-year course.

Unions out of touch with reality?
Does anyone know if nursing is a three or four year course? If only three years then perhaps the initial year should be almost completely 'hands on' in hospital or care homes learning these skills. It's only the same as other vocational degree courses where often there is a year in industry, what used to be called a 'sandwich' course when I was a student.
I certainly spent most of my third year in some very 'fishy' situations

I have a friend who was a nursing sister. She says nursing went down when nurses stopped helping change, feed, etc and so really care for patients. A lot can be learnt while feeding and so communicating, changing and so observing which is otherwise missed - the carers not having the training or expertise to observe.

A union chap on our local tv news questioned where they would find enough carer positions for trainee nurses to fill. Which rather shows the how much the unions are out of touch with reality.

Oops. I must have found a different thread. Yes, there are two threads saying the same thing. I noticed this happen before especially when people feel strongly about something.
I think this question has been asked before but is GN able to combine threads?

Found it Sel. I think the difference in this thread is the attitude of the RCN. I was honestly shocked by their comments. I can understand that trained nurses would feel this basic care is usually a job for junior staff and care staff. But it ought to form a significant part of their training and no one should feel it is beneath them to perform these caring tasks, no matter how senior. Firstly because lack of this basic care is actually life threatening and secondly the feelings and needs of their patients should come first.
The RCN is either not choosing the right type of candidate to go forward into nursing or the degree nature of their course is giving nurses the attitude that they are too highly trained to perform basic tasks.
I come from a family with medical backgrounds. Four of my aunts trained as nurses during the war and all went on to senior positions. One of them is 94 and she remembers how even ask 'matron' she was prepared to 'roll up her sleeves' and get stuck in when it was required. Her latest pithy comment on this was 'if they're too squeamish to deal with a bit of s**t, how will they be able to deal with blood and guts!'

Where is the other thread Sel ?

Just notice there is another thread on this and apparently it's 12mths on the wards, not 6.

Aren't they trying to address this by suggesting trainee nurses actually spend 6 months working on the wards as care assistants, ie washing, feeding etc? I know the union has called the idea 'stupid' Not the best choice of word I would have thought.

Disgusting, with that attitude they do not deserve to be called nurses