Poem by the last nurse - Heroic nurses at Texas Health Presbyterian caring for Ebola Mr. Duncan

Thank you to the nurses who care for all patients especially those who respond to the most vulnerable and lonely like Mr. Duncan, the patient who died of the Ebola virus.

I was certainly inspired by this poem referenced by spokespersons on an American Nurses Association (ANA) webinar about Ebola preparedness.  

The last nurse to leave the hospital room where Thomas Eric Duncan died has written a poem about the Ebola patient, penned during the sleepless days after Duncan's death, a source told ABC News.

The source provided the poem to ABC News, noting that the nurse who wrote it asked to remain anonymous. Duncan, the first person in the United States to be diagnosed with Ebola, died at the Dallas hospital on Oct. 8. Two of the nurses who cared for Duncan -- Nina Pham, 26, and Amber Vinson, 29, have been diagnosed with Ebola.

(Editor's note: THR refers to Texas Health Resources, the company that owns Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital.)

A message to you

Inspired by the THR Family

You came to us sick, frightened, confused,

What happened next became international news.

We saw you so ill, with everything to lose

Our goal was to help you because that’s what we do.

Alone in a dark ICU room

We fought for your life, our team and you.

We cared for you kindly

No matter our fear

You thanked us each time that we came near.

As each day pressed on, you fought so hard

To beat the virus that dealt every card.

No matter how sick or contagious you were

We held your hand, wiped your tears, and continued our care.

Your family was close, but only in spirit

They couldn't come in; we just couldn't risk it.

Then the day came we saw you in there

We wiped tears from your eyes, knowing the end was drawing near.

Then it was time, but we never gave up

Until the good lord told us he had taken you up.

Our dear Mr. Duncan, the man that we knew

Though you lost the fight, we never gave up on you.

All of us here; at Presby and beyond

Lift our hats off to you, now that you’re gone.

You touched us in ways that no one will know

We thank you kind sir for this chance to grow.

May you find peace in heaven above

And know that we cared with nothing but love.

Belgian children are now the victims of the slippery slope predicted by the right to life advocates

Belgium lawmakers vote for children's right to die law. This is horrible because children are frequently the beneficiaries of spontaneous remissions. Of course, some children have difficult developmental difficulties from which they may never recover. Nevertheless, children should be the recipients of boundless hope. Anyone who puts out the option of death to a child for any reason has, truly, lost their own humanity. 

There's absolutely no reason, whatsoever, under any circumstances, to offer euthanasia as an end of life option for a child. Children are incapable of making these decisions for themselves; therefore no one should be authorized to make these life ending decisions on their behalf, regardless of the intention. Never. 

Although evidence of loss of brain function over an extended period of time can require the removal of life support, this decision should not be  interpreted as euthanasia. Euthanasia is the intentional intervention at the end of life to bring about an unnatural and premature death. Children deserve hope, not death.

As a professional registered nurse, I've seen families bond and medical providers rally to save the lives of children. It's unethical to put families and medical care givers in a position of advocating for the right to die for children. Moreover, it's morally unconscionable to permit euthanasia for children, because they have a strong capacity to recover from illness and injury. Children often outlive their terminal illness diagnosis. 

How many times do we read about children who are the victims of drowning being revived with no apparent harm? This is particularly evident when children are the victims of hypothermia. Moreover, children respond favorably to life saving interventions like transplants and immune therapies to treat malignancies.

Nevertheless, you must listen to this. 

I've heard parents tell me how having a mentally ill child is more difficult to deal with than terminal illness.

Do blog readers need to read the above again?  

Parents have told me, as a nurse, how a mentally ill child is more difficult to deal with than terminal illness.

Treating children with mental illnesses are expensive and recoveries are rare.  

Treating children with life threatening illness like cancer or metabolic diseases can be successfully accomplished. Remissions are common.

Children, especially those in Belgium, are now the victims of the slippery slope predicted by the zealous right-to-life advocates. There's dwindling hope for anyone with terminal illnesses to live longer lives, if people are considering euthanasia for children.  

A society that voluntarily authorizes children to euthanize will also put at risk the end of life care for everyone else.  

Belgium has now validated the ugly outcome of the "slippery slope" argument. This euthanasia decision by Belgium lawmakers is unethical and it puts all people with terminal illnesses at risk for having caregivers abandon hope for remissions or extended life options - especially those with mental illnesses.

As a nurse, I firmly believe the above to be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God. My opinion is validated from experience. 

Religion Alert: Contraception has Nothing to do with a War on Religion

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/romney-obama-waging-war-on-religion/2012/08/09/192c4e02-e213-11e1-a25e-15067bb31849_blog.html

I'm a nurse.

After prolonged and wasteful debate about the urgent need for US health care reform, President Obama's opponents, led by Mitt Romney, are now slandering the passage of the affordable care act (ACA) as being anti-religious freedom.  I submit, contraception is only a religious freedom issue when women are denied access to having it for the purposes of family planning or medical treatment.

Rachel Weiner writes in the Washington Post blog site "The Fix":

"Mitt Romney makes an appeal to the Catholic vote with his latest ad, moving away from the economy to talk about health care and contraception.  President Obama touted newly expanded contraception coverage in ads aimed at women. (But) ...Now Romney is using the expanded (contraception) coverage to say the president declared a 'war on religion'."

As a Roman Catholic professional registered nurse, I'm outraged by this ridiculous Romney campaign claim. It's yet another example of how Romney shows no moral leadership when it comes to spending his unlimited campaign money, without regard for providing solutions to real health care access issues.  Women need support when it comes to access to health care. Our reproductive systems are not political fodder.

Moreover, in my nursing opinion, religion has nothing to do with contraception.  On the other hand, religion does call on us to care for our neighbor.  In other words, Biblical reference supports providing people with access to quality, affordable health care without regard for a person's pre-existing conditions, gender or ability to pay (Roman's 13:8). 

As a result of women being evaluated by medical professionals, like physicians and advanced practice nurses, during routine screenings for renewed contraceptive prescriptions, female health improves because of the preventive care offered, like mamograms or PAP smears for cervical cancer.

Although Roman Catholic Bishops, along with other religious sects like Mormons and Muslims, disapprove of women using contraception, an exemption is offered to protect the religious liberty for these particular advocates, who find contraception to, somehow, be a religious issue.  

Of course, contraception isn't a religious issue. Rather, it's a women's health issue.  Do women realize that, when religious zealots talk about blocking insurance contraceptive coverage, we're potentially at risk for loosing access to health care for treatment of endometriosis and menstrual anomalies (for example)?

Why not an exemption for Viagra? Evidently, Roman Catholic Bishops, Mormons and Muslims don't have issues with Viagra, the men's medical cure for sexual impotence, because no one is calling for an insurance exemption for this coverage under health care reform.

As a nurse, I absolutely don't understand how contraception, when used for the purpose of family planning or as medical treatment, is anywhere near being a religious issue. It's a religious issue only when women are prevented from access to contraception for these valid purposes.