April 05, 2006

More Government = Less Freedom

Here is a long commentary written by Cheryl Welch of the Star-News of Wilmington, NC. It's a long, detailed complaint about, well, I'll summarize for you so you won't have to read the whole thing: If only we had less freedom and more government, less people would die.

Now I can't tell if this article is supposed to be in the "news" section of the paper or not, but it's clearly an opinion piece with a few facts carelessly tossed about. The premise is that a woman was choked because her husband choked her while working for a private health facility and if the state had screened him properly, he wouldn't have been working there, and therefore wouldn't have choked his wife.

The article bemoans the fact that this man was accused of a crime and was not immediately fired from his job. Seriously. Yes, the day he was convicted of a crime, he was fired, but that's not good enough for the author of this piece -- he apparently should have been fired when he was simply accused of wrongdoing. I wonder if Ms. Welch applies that principle to her existence, too.

She goes on to complain that nurse's aides, certified by the state, do not have a criminal check done to get certified, but actually DO have a criminal check done before they're hired by the facility. I'm not exactly sure why this is a problem, but Ms. Welch thinks the government should maintain all certification processes and include criminal background checks at the government level, instead of allowing employers access to that information.

I'm not sure exactly why anyone thinks that government can do a better job than private industry. Government has as much a vested interest as private industry, only a worse one -- private industry is limited by money, while government only exists today to create more government.

Instead of increasing regulation, the state should DECREASE nurse's aide regulation -- allow a private group to certify nurse's aides any way they want to. That would even allow MORE THAN ONE registry! It would allow nationwide registries! It would create levels of competition never seen before in nursing. But that would also increase freedom, which big-government supporters like Ms. Welch apparently do not like.

Posted by: Ogre at 11:02 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I can add to this. The federal government mandated that CNA's backgrounds be checked by each employer because the state could not keep up with those who constantly moved and switched jobs. Actually the fedgov doesn't MANDATE, but it does highly recommend. IN NH, we aides have to pay for our own background checks each year- and the results have to to mailed to our Board Of Nursing. The BON maintains a file for each of us; each employer is still responsible for checking though. Kind of a double whammy. The regulations for anything NURSING are astronomical; nursing homes are the most regulated mess in the country yet we constantly see problems.

Posted by: Raven at April 05, 2006 07:18 PM (8oVpK)

2 And it's wrong. There is NO need for governmental "certification," "oversight" or anything. The process would be BETTER if private companies did this sort of work. I would run one myself! There would be different levels of certifications! Imagine being in the nursing field: Yes, I have level 6 S.T.A.R. certification from this national agency and class-B certification from this other agency. It would be an incredible amount of freedom and EVERYONE would benefit tremendously.

Posted by: Ogre at April 05, 2006 07:27 PM (/k+l4)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
17kb generated in CPU 0.0138, elapsed 0.1368 seconds.
88 queries taking 0.1303 seconds, 191 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.