Dyslexia is a chronic problem that is related to reading abilities in people. It affects a large number of people, especially people with various disabilities. Up to 15% of the population in developed countries suffer from this condition. People with dyslexia often have problems not only with reading, but also with writing, spelling, mathematics, and sometimes music. Continue reading “Dyslexia”
In 2011, the state of New York created a special fund to benefit babies that suffer from birth-related neurological damage. The fund has previously only been made available to hospital born babies as it is supported by fees on hospital-based obstetrical services.
However, the State Supreme Court has recently determined that the intent of state lawmakers did not place limitations on the setting of birth – therefore opening the use of the indemnity fund for homebirth deliveries as well.
The decision comes following a medical malpractice action against a homebirth provider that was settled for $3 million, $1.8 million of which was intended to come from the state medical indemnity fund – a claim denied by the fund’s third party administrator.
The state of New York defines a neurologically related impairment at birth as an injury to the spinal cord of a live infant caused by deprivation of oxygen or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery or resuscitation.
Just like the North Carolina General Assembly, many other state legislatures across the country are considering legislation that would remove the requirement of physician supervision of nurses. In Michigan, SB 320 would propose to allow Certified Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs) to practice without physician oversight. This proposal was concerning enough to one Michigan mother – a mother who also happens to be a nurse – that she was prompted to write an opinion piece to her local paper.
Read the account of her daughter’s near death experience while in the dental chair and how the leadership and expertise of a physician anesthesiologist prevented the worst case scenario, HERE.
It is our hope that North Carolina lawmakers will heed the warning of this story and protect North Carolina patients by maintaining physician supervision of all advanced practice nurses – including CRNAs.
PUBLIC HEARING: September 16, 2015, 10:00 a.m.
174 North Church Street, Concord, NC 28025
The North Carolina Board of Chiropractic Examiners has proposed new rules which would increase the required education hours for acupuncture services to 300 (from 200), would permit a process of random office inspections and would also prohibit Board members from serving in leadership positions of the Chiropractic Association during their term.
This filing has a proposed effective date of January 1, 2016.
Full text of proposed rules changes can be found here.
One North Carolina mother recently contacted the North Carolina General Assembly to plead for more physician supervision in nursing practice. Following the unnecessary and tragic death of her son Brody during a planned home birth, Ms. Davidson writes the following:
I am writing to tell you about my son, Brody.
In 2011, Brody died during an attempted home birth. My uterus ruptured and Brody suffocated.
It’s important that you know about Brody so that you can understand why doctors must play a vital role in making child birth safer for mothers and their children.
My decision to birth at home in North Carolina, under the care of a certified nurse midwife, led to the death of my child. After Brody’s death, my midwife told me she should have referred me to an obstetrician for a second opinion about giving birth at home.
I know now that because I had a previous c-section I had a 1/200 risk of rupture and needed close monitoring and immediate access to a surgeon if necessary. My midwife erroneously decided that attempting a homebirth with a scarred uterus was not a variation of normal and did not require careful monitoring or speedy access to an operating room.
I had a perfect pregnancy. But with one contraction, my perfect pregnancy turned into a high-risk medical crisis with a catastrophic outcome. A midwife could do nothing to save my baby.
Losing a child is something no one should endure. That’s why I oppose any legislation that eliminates the requirement that doctors supervise certified nurse midwives or that would license poorly trained, so-called “professional” midwives trained only by their peers.
Removing these protections will make labor and delivery more dangerous and lead to more deaths like Brody’s.
My midwife needed more supervision, not less. With more supervision, perhaps vital resuscitation equipment would not have been missing. Perhaps I would have had a second ultrasound that would have shown how big my baby had grown, or how my scar was breaking down. More supervision, not less, might have saved my baby’s life.
Those who support home birth are happy to share their stories and make it sound like homebirth is safe. But there are many women who, like me, chose home birth and have suffered tragedy as a consequence. Our stories too frequently remain untold because of the pain of our loss.
Please give us—and our lost infants—a voice, and listen to our concerns.
One of these moles is harmless, one of them is a life-threatening melanoma.
Dermatologists train for more than a decade to know the difference.
Melanoma is curable if it is caught early—so a correct diagnosis is literally the difference between life and death.
SB695 and HB807 would allow nurses to diagnose skin cancer without back up from a supervising dermatologist.
For a patient with melanoma, that could be the mistake of a lifetime.
PROTECT PATIENT SAFETY— OPPOSE SB 695 AND HB807.
*In the above example, the larger mole is benign. The smaller one is cancerous.
View a pdf of this handout, courtesy of the NC Dermatology Association here.
The NC Coalition to Protect Patients supports team-based healthcare. To protect patients, the healthcare team must be led by those with the highest level of training – physicians.
SB 695/HB 807 would end physician supervision of many types of nurses and fragment the healthcare team. Supporters of these bills say that, once unsupervised, nurses will relocate from the urban areas to rural communities and expand access to health care. This is a false and dangerous promise.
The American Academy of Nurse Practitioners reports that only 18% of Nurse Practitioners practice in rural areas.
North Carolina’s supervision requirement protects patient safety – it does not prevent nurses from practicing in rural or underserved areas.
Current law requires that supervising physicians and nurse practitioners work as a team and be continuously available to one another for consultation via direct communication or telecommunication and that a written plan is developed for performing various medical tasks, prescribing medications and handling emergency situations.
Although supervised, in North Carolina there are no limits on nurse practitioners in regard to geography or practice location. In states that have authorized the independent practice of nurses, neither access to care nor the cost of care has substantially improved.
There is no evidence that eliminating the safeguard of physician supervision will improve access to medical care in rural North Carolina.
Physicians are the number one provider of primary care services in North Carolina’s rural counties. Even in NC counties containing federally designated Health Professional Shortage Areas, Primary Care Physicians outnumber nurse practitioners by more than 2,600.
In fact, eliminating physician supervision of nurses is more likely to harm patients in all areas of our state. Current administrative rules require supervising physicians and nurse practitioners to continually work together to evaluate the quality of the care provided to their shared patients and to create plans to improve clinical outcomes.
SB 695/HB 807 eliminates the Quality Improvement Process currently in place between doctors and nurse practitioners.
This puts patients at risk for unnecessary, adverse outcomes – no matter where they live.
For these reasons, the Coalition opposes SB 695 and HB 807.
Healthcare is a team sport. Every player has the important role of providing access and managing costs. When it comes to safety, leadership of the healthcare team must remain with those with the highest level of education and training. Physician supervision is key to protecting North Carolina patients. For this reason, the Coalition opposes SB 695/HB 807.
As crossover approaches at the North Carolina General Assembly it is possible that SB 118/HB 913 – Naturopathic Doctors Licensing Act may be debated. This legislation proposes to create a third classification of physician in North Carolina.
Current law permits the licensure of Medical Doctors (MD) and Doctors of Osteopathy (DO) – both regulated by the North Carolina Medical Board. SB 118/HB 913 propose to license Naturopathic Doctors (ND) under their own licensing board.
Only 18 states currently license naturopaths, none of which are in the Southeast.
Allowing practitioners without medical training to refer to themselves as doctors is confusing to the public and poses a risk to safety. Use of the initials ND is especially confusing when compared to MD (medical doctor) and NP (nurse practitioner) titles.
SB 118/HB 913 would allow naturopaths to order tests and manage chronic disease as a primary care provider. The bills allow naturopaths to treat infants and children, diagnosis and treat mental health conditions, even diagnosis and treat cancer.
If naturopathic treatment is endorsed by the legislature as adequate treatment of life-threatening and chronic disease, patients are put in harms way. Ineffective naturopathic treatment could delay much needed medical services, leading to complications and even death.
Finally, in states where naturopaths have been licensed, there appears to be an immediate and constant push for expanded scopes of practice to include the ability to prescribe controlled substances. The American Association of Naturopathic Physicians notes on its website, “… seven more states are pursuing scope modernization, particularly expanded prescribing authority” this year alone.
For these reasons the Coalition opposes SB 118 and HB 913.
North Carolina’s OB/Gyn doctors and Certified Nurse Midwives work side-by-side as partners to ensure that their patients – women and soon-to-be-born children – get the best and safest care possible. Cooperation and high standards of care are only enhanced by flexible, but necessary, physician supervision of nurse midwives. Physician OB/Gyns complete twice as many years of education and over ten times as many clinical training hours as nurse midwives.
Nurse midwives are an essential part of a team approach to ensuring the safety of thousands of mothers and children in our state. As with any team, leadership by those with the most experience and education is necessary.
Every mother and child deserves the best and safest care. Lowering standards of care – reducing safety – to increase access to care is a false choice that no woman or family should face. That’s why NCCPP opposes reducing safety standards such as eliminating the requirement that nurse midwives work supervised by a physician.
Passage of SB 695 or HB 807 would allow lesser qualified providers to direct the care of patients with the highest risk. It could also leave those providers unprepared to handle complications that arise in even the healthiest patients. Passage of this legislation will give women and their families a false sense of security that midwives can do everything necessary to keep mothers and their newborns as safe as possible.
Every pregnant woman and every newborn in our state deserves the best and safest care – because problems during labor and delivery can come at any moment, without warning, for even the healthiest women. Eliminating physician supervision of nurse midwives is simply not worth the risk.