• Gates9@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    19 hours ago

    This is one of the biggest problems in the medical system and the boomers are about to learn all about it

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      For most of humanity, a major medical issue in the elderly would usually bring about death soon enough. We’ve gotten to a point where we can extend people’s lives far beyond after these events, but it costs a lot of money to maintain these people in these conditions. Something is going to give.

      • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Sort of a ridiculous statement in response to “we should have nurse/patient ratios. Theres plenty of money. Tax the rich, end the for-profit healthcare system. That’s the only thing that can give because the working class doesn’t have any more to give.

  • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    15 hours ago

    This sounds like good news? Putting a cap on the number of nurses isn’t the way to reduce understaffing. Or is this a reporter that can’t math?

    • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      It’s gotta be the latter because the former is insane. I suppose a maximum ratio could prevent well funded hospitals from scooping up all the nurses, but that’s not something the nurses union would endorse.

    • Mohamed@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      The article fucked it up. The bill (first version) says: "Section 8 of this bill establishes the maximum ratios for the number of patients that may be assigned to a direct care nurse at one time in certain hospitals in a county … ".