re: Defeat the Nurse Practitioner scope of practice expansion - Louisiana SB 187

Smack, that's the problem. They want the same responsibility but not. They want the same pay, but not. But they don't want the liability

I wish you people knew how many times some dumbass had been seeing an NP and got in really deep shite medically because of it. Then we are expected to swoop in and fix the shite, then be on the hook to make sure all is well and good. How many times did the "caring" NP come check on the people in the ICU/hospital on nights and weekends? How many times did they skip their daughters 6th birthday to tend to someone in the ICU for pulmonary emboli that an NP has misdiagnosed and treated for acute bronchitis? Go frick yourselves. I would love a list of all you dumbasses to keep amongst ourselves. We will certainly be glad to direct you to the most accessible NP around.

My patients do have to wait. And when I see them, it's worth it to them. There is a shortage of good providers. Not "providers". People will sit in my waiting room for 3 and 4 hours on end and not complain. This isn't a badge of honor. I hate for people to wait, but if they are sick and need me...I will see them. My lines and full parking lot are not from a lack of access to care. It's demand. If you don't want to wait, I'm sure you can find a provider with an empty arse waiting room that will see you right away. You want fast food service? Hope you like fast food quality.

I'm not anti Doctor. Im very thankful for doctors and modern medicine.
I'm just pro options for medical care. I'm pro these kinds of disruptions that will force professionals to get better or become obsolete.

And are we not facing a doctor shortage in the near future? Single payer is coming, absent disaster, and there's no way you guys will
Be able to meet the demand. Or that's how it seems to us ignorant folks. Please correct our misconceptions, but don't tell me that you are looking out for my best interests by limiting options for basic medical care.

quote:

---

So what happens when 10,000 new NPs, hypothetically, want to provide care? Will doctors be able to meet that demand? If not, what happens?

---

They will have to get thousands of hours of supervised care before they can practice solo if it is similar to what they tried to pass down in Arkansas. What killed me is that one of the dipshits trying to pass it refuses to see an NP. That should tell you something. And when challenged to a live debate on television, the NP's promoting backed down. You want to see a intellectual asswhipping? Make that debate happen.

quote:

---

there's no way you guys will Be able to meet the demand. Or that's how it seems to us ignorant folks. Please correct our misconceptions,

---

Call 10 primary care physician offices in Louisiana. Respond to me with the number who aren't accepting new patients.

Yes, they could use more. There's plenty of work out there, and there are lots meeting the demand. I've not yet met a single person who, in their town or the surrounding 10 miles, was not able to find a physician accepting new patients.

quote:

---

There's not going to be a 10,000 provider expansion

---

If there was, the current system would break down, because the 10% requirement is a limitation on the amount of care that can be provided by NPs.

quote:

---

If there was, the current system would break down, because the 10% requirement is a limitation on the amount of care that can be provided by NPs.

---

Let's do some Math. 4,000,000 residents in the state. 10,000 NEW providers. Cross out the zeroes, that leaves 400 patients per new provider. which, actually, could be very easily managed if those 10,000 providers were in existing NP offices.

Again, you haven't explained or attempted to explain one single way that this increases access to care.

I say let the NPs practice independently. The trial lawyers will eat them alive and that end it.

quote:

---

Accepting new patients is not the same thing as providing timely care. Y'all just come off as obstructionist would-be gatekeepers.

---

Some offices? Maybe. It wouldn't change anything. I see pt's by schedule and then based on acuity. It really doesn't matter. Most NP's will not leave the security of being under a doc. The ones that do will sink and be diet pill, pain pill mills. Seen it time and time again.

Once again, give them the same liability and standards as we have to adhere to and then they can jump the frick up to the plate. But don't say you can do everything I can but you don't have to provide 24/7 care and be liable to that pt 365/yr. Just wait til they see their assholes get ripped by malpractice and all the overhead involved with being "the man". Like I said, I don't give a shite either way. I think it's bullshite and insulting, but have at it.

If it is passed, I think it should be tied to a bill allowing paralegals to practice as full blown attorneys after working in a law office for the same number of hours. Same damn difference. I think people, especially the poor, need access to quality counsel. By increasing numbers we will increase access to competent counsel and lower cost. The poor are vastly undefended and make up a disproportionate population of our prisons. I feel this would be a fair trade.

quote:

---

I think it should be tied to a bill allowing paralegals to practice as full blown attorneys after working in a law office for the same number of hours. Same damn difference. I think people, especially the poor, need access to quality counsel. By increasing numbers we will increase access to competent counsel and lower cost.

---