‘NHS spending accounts for the vast bulk of the current £116bn Department of Health budget – £101bn of it in fact. But it’s what’s happening to the remaining £15bn that ministers are not shouting about.
Next year that pot will be cut by more than 10% in real terms to £13.6bn. By the end of the Parliament the drop will be 20% in real terms.

The size of the fund doesn’t sound a lot when set beside the money for the frontline. But it goes a long way.

About £5bn of it is spent by Health Education England in training the doctors and nurses of the future’ (bbc online, Nov. 26, 2015).

It’s this £5bn that is going, dearhearts. They are going to rob Peter Nurse to pay Paul Hospital.

It’s a constant shuffling of the cards, performed by illusionists to make you think they have a strategy.

Let’s face facts, how many students are going to enroll for any type of nurse training if they have to pay for it?

Are they going to be able to pay of their loan over a long career in nursing?

Hardly, most newly qualified nurses are used and abused before their inevitable date with the knackers’ yard.

5-10 years max, then the chop, or the ditching of nursing as a career.

Ask student nurses after one year of their course, do you feel like borrowing another £9,000?

The government will redefine what a nurse is – someone who completes an 18 months works-based course in a nursing speciality.

40% cheaper!

And what of the officers of the ship of nursing? – the fraternity of lecturers, those that no longer ‘do’.

Bought on an ad hoc basis through agencies by Hospital Trusts to provide a bit of theory to courses that are heavily biased toward competency in performing specific nursing tasks.

All competing to be Lord or Lady of the Flies!

God help Piggy!

Hope you have paid off your mortgage!

The game is about to end.

The NMC will simply take their subs from the new breed of nurse.

Same with the RCN.

Goodbye, nice knowing you!

Piss off!

lenin nightingale 2015




The likelihood of medication errors in the nursing home is well recognized in America.

In response to the certainty of errors, certain state inspectors must determine the number of medication errors prevalent in a nursing home as part of an annual survey.

There are acceptable percentages and severity of errors in the daily dispensing of medications to residents under Medicare and Medicaid regulations, but an excessive number of such errors lead to the facility being cited and required to develop and fulfill a plan of correction.

The very fact that there is an acceptable level of errors would suggest a high probability that drug errors will not be eliminated in the current system of dispensing medications, making all nursing home residents at risk for minor errors, and periodically to significant, possibly life threatening situations.

Thus, individual nurses that are responsible for safe administration of medicines, and their employers face considerable penalties if breaking regulation §483.25(m) Medication errors, which requires the facility to ensure that 1. It is free of medication error rates of 5 percent or greater. (2.) Residents are free of any significant medication errors.

A nurse may report their facility for non-compliance with regulation §483.25(m),although, how likely is this?, with employers holding a noose around nurses’ necks. This is still rather ironic, though, when compared to the situation in the UK, where a nurse can be reported to the NMC for minor, and historic misdemeanors at the blinking of a vindictive employer’s eyelid, yet care facilities only face being savaged by a dead sheep called CQC.

I have often noted that the UK has adopted American (free market) approaches to health care (private nursing homes, etc.) without any meaningful penalties on corporate failure. The axe in the UK falls mainly on the nurse.

A study of 36 Ameerican healthcare organizations showed that medication errors occur in almost 20% of administrations (Arch. Intern. Med. 2002; 162: 1897-1903).

Procedural failures included occurrences such as failure to read a medication label, failure to check patient identification, and nonseptic technique.

Clinical errors involved mistakes that included wrong drug, wrong dose, and wrong strength of medication.

Failures and errors were classified according to severity on a scale of 1-5, to which I add a description of effect:

1. Unlikely to effect patient
2. Small effect
3. Considerable effect
4. Major effect
5. Fatal effect

The relative significance of medication errors is a matter of professional judgment.

If the resident’s condition requires rigid control, a single missed or wrong dose can be highly significant.

If the drug is from a category that requires strict control a single missed or wrong dose can be highly significant.

If an error is occurring with any frequency, there is more reason to classify the error as significant.

Possible Causes
• Basic Human Error – to err is human.
• Frequent Distractions/Care Changes – dearhearts, have you ever worked in the coal face of a busy, understaffed, nursing home or hospital? Have you ever been besieged by wandersome and confused elderly residents, or hounded by concerned ones? In the middle of a drug round have you been interrupted by a doctor on the phone, a moaning manager, and uncle Tom Cobley and all?
• Too Much Workload/Overtime – the entire evolutionary history of humankind encourages the body to shut down at night, but have you ever worked 12 hour night after night shifts with the expectation of unblinking awakeness and clarity of mind? If a prisoner of war was subjected to this treatment, the Geneva Convention would be cited! Good enough for nurses, though. Another stick for nurses to be beaten with by the Perfect Ones that control nursing.
• Improper Training – three years of being Jack and Jill of all nursing trades does not make a nurse an expert in any one, that comes some way after training, and, to be frank, the quality and compatability of some overseas nurse training is zilch. Ask the Perfect Ones of the NMC how many striking off orders in the last year applied to staff trained overseas. 10%? 15%?, oh no, dearhearts, the true figure is as shocking as it is inevitable.

Overall, 2,266 (53.1%) of administrations were interrupted one or more times.

The results showed that 74.4% of administrations had procedural failures, and 25% were associated with clinical errors.

The procedural failure checklist included 10 items. The most common mistake was failure to check a patient’s identification (2,500 of 4,271 administrations).

Four items related to a requirement that two nurses be involved in the drug administration. Two nurses failed to check an intravenous administration device where a control device was in use in 55 of 70 cases (78.6%), and compliance with the requirement for two nurses to witness administration of dangerous drugs was only 51.4% (164 of 319 cases). On the other hand, two nurses checked the preparation of a dangerous drug in 99% of cases, and two nurses signed the dangerous drug register in 94%.

The most common clinical error was incorrect timing of administration (688 of 4,271).

Errors that were most likely to be level 3-4 in severity were uncommon: wrong drug (13 cases), extra dose (seven), and administration of unordered drug (six).

Overall, 1,067 of 4,271 (25%) administrations were associated with one or more clinical errors, which were level 3-4 severity in 10.8% of cases.

‘Nurse experience provided no protection against making a clinical error and was associated with higher procedural failure rates’, the authors concluded.

Too true!

Florence Nightingale wouldn’t have much time to walk around with a lamp on a busy night shift today. I wonder what she would make of one of her nurses being sent to face a NMC firing squad for having made an error which 1. was unlikely to effect the patient, 2. had only a small effect. Yet, this is what happens today.

No nurse should be reported to the NMC for scale 1. and 2. misdemeanours, unless they happened repeatedly.

No nurse should have a catalogue of petty offences compiled on them by vindictive employers retrospectively. All issues to be dealt with promptly, then forgotten.

No nurse should be expected to be Superman or Superwoman at all times, only the totally absurd would expect this.

No nurse should pay the NMC subscription fee, it’s like paying for the rope that will hang you.

Set up an alternative Medical Council, comprising of doctors and nursing staff.

Down with the stooges of big business!

1. Physical/psychological/sexual abuse, not reporting same.
2. Fabricating/shredding records.
3. Medicine errors – scale 3-5 only, or 1-2 if constantly repeated.
4. Not communicating important information about a patient’s medical condition.
5. Incompetence in procedures which result in scale 3-5 effect, or 1-2 effect if constantly repeated.
6. Fake CV/qualifications/health history.

Petty and historic offences to be dealt with at source.

The guiding principle should be would you have been able to do better.

Hospital and nursing home environments that promote undue stress through short staffing should result in heavy fines on those that run them.

Stop allowing employers to ask the NMC to whip nurses without very good cause!
lenin nightingale 2015

Nurse Education In Chains

We publish this  as a matter of interest .

It was written 20 years ago, by Lenin Nightingale, in response to the then proposed Project 2000 for nursing, and applies to the UK. Nurse education remains under question, facing possible re-structuring yet again.

There are early references within this piece of course, due to it’s early creation and also due to the necessity to research history. Note recurring themes of propaganda, and  indoctrination.

During recent ‘in service’ meetings, that sought to clarify the content, methods, and intentions of the Project 2000 (Student Nurse) Curriculum, I became aware that this curriculum was a potential vehicle of indoctrination and propaganda. I sought to clarify my thoughts on this subject, to focus on the distinctions between indoctrination, propaganda and teaching, so as to be better professionally prepared to make insightful contributions to discussion forums , concomitantly being more enabled to effect the content, methods and intentions of the ‘Project 2000’ curriculum.

The term indoctrination is a nebulous one, Wilson (1964) contends that there has bee a historical failure to clearly demarcate between teaching and indoctrination/propaganda: The Samual Johnson dictionary (1756) equates the verbs ‘to educate’ and ‘to bring up’. Thus, the word ‘indoctrination’ was often used previously to refer to the processes of getting a person to learn something. However, there is now in use a range of terms, including ‘education’. ‘training’, ‘conditioning’. ‘propaganda’ and ‘indoctrination’ and thus these terms are deemed to identify the distinctions in content, methods, and intentions between these concepts. For instance, the words ‘indoctrination’/’propaganda’ generally refer to particular intentions that some ‘educators’ have in mind, for example, to get people to think without reason, or in an unshakable way.

Following such preliminary investigations, I sought to pursue the distinction between teaching and indoctrination / propaganda to greater levels of abstraction by analysing a wide range of relevant literature, and by engaging in dialogue with colleagues. From such processes of ‘triangulation’, where limited perspectives would not provide the evidence, the following journal entries emerged;
“The distinction between teaching and indoctrination / propaganda is not solely determined by the content of a curriculum in that, as Hosper’s contended, both the teacher and the indoctrinator /propagandist may present information /beliefs as undeniably true ‘facts’. As Wilson (1964) points out, few things we teach are ‘absolute certainties’. (3.04.94)
“The distinction between teaching and indoctrination /propaganda does not depend on the methods to convey the curriculum, since however unimaginative ad uninteresting teaching methods are, however much they are the product of the teacher, teasching from conviction , or are not grounded in rational argument, it is not necessarily the case that such methods purposefully seek to eradicate rational evidence”. (3.04.93)
“It is the intention which determines whether a process is indoctrination /propaganda. The intention to close the mind to reason is taken first” (5.04.93).

Clearly, the pivotal role of intention in indoctrination /propaganda is confirmed- the dual intentions to close the mind to reason and to fill the mind with beliefs (presented as facts). To these ends, far from encouraging the use of evidence and reason to validate their proposals, the indoctrination / propagandist seek to suppress all evidence contrary to their beliefs. Thus, the curriculum of the indoctrination / propagandist contains neither breadth nor balance; is bereft of progression in learning, with beliefs presented as static entities; and thus, learners are not facilitated to develop analytical perspective.

Such narrow learning opportunities are indicated of a world- view representing the ‘scientific’ paradigm, within which individuals can be ‘conditioned’ (in the ‘operant’ sense ) by to indoctrinal stimuli, reinforced by the ‘reward’ of being accepted as a fellow partisan, to support the particular beliefs of the indoctrination / propagandist. Such support takes the form of a ’blind’ adherence to the beliefs being promulgated, as it is a central element of the ‘successful’ indoctrination /propaganda that recipients are unaware of being ‘conditioned ‘—- at the initial stage of the recipients exposure to the indoctrinator / propagandist or as a product of ceaseless repetition of ‘the message’, which, according to Perry (1966) becomes;
“An irresistible spell which binds the mind in a state of hypnotic fixation”. (p.131).
It is not, however, only through the process of repetition that particular beliefs can be inculated- alternative view points can be suppressed and disparaged through the subtle strategic of innuendo and insinuation; the use of a gesture and a disparaging tone of voice, the telling of a racist / sexist joke; it was propounded by Mussolini (1037) that such uses of self have the potential to make the most seemingly innocuous subjects the vehicle for spreading partisan beliefs. These beliefs will also be further promoted if their recipients can not voluntarily select from a pool of educators those whom they wish to educate them, as opposed to being the recipients of a narrow, ‘single source’ perspective.

Thus far, central themes of the concepts of indoctrination / propaganda have been identified, and, essentially :
“These terms are representative of a deliberate intention to ‘condition’ people to accept beliefs, presented as facts, that are not supported by evidence or reason”. (Learning Journal 20.3.93).
However, as much as these terms are used synonymously, sharing common themes, there is an additional, political dimension to the concept of propaganda that needs to be identified, in that :
“The individual educator may seek to indoctrinate others with his/her own personal beliefs, where as indoctrination becomes propaganda when the object of establishing those beliefs is to establish someone in power for whom the propagandist acts as agent. In this sense, propaganda is an undertaking by political partisans “. (A Reflection o the Contentions of Gransci (1934), Personal Journal 2.4.93).
Such political partisanship, according to Althuser (1972) is represented in ‘ ideological state apparatuses’ (I.S.A’s)- including the educational I.S.A, and so insidious is the ideological influence of the educational I.S.A that it is difficult for people to see it in operation. It is so taken for granted and has become so internalised in teachers outlooks that it appears to be no more than a manifestation of human nature.

Colleagues, alternatively stated that we do not live in a totalitarian, one-party state, so it can not be possible that any curriculum can be the product of a single ideological force, but must, rather, be the product of pluralistic dialogue. After consideration of this point, analysing relevant literature, and continuing to hold, and reflect upon, dialogue with colleagues, I suggest :
“ That for propaganda to occur it is not necessary that there should be totalitarian one-party rule, it is not only necessary that ideological competition should be so unequal as to give overwhelming advantage to one side against another “.
So as ;
“To protect, maintain, or advance a social order based on minority power. This is the process of authoritarian control over culture, which Gramsci (1934) identified as being the prime task of the dominant (capitalist) social order, a task accomplished through the institutions- schools, nurse education establishments , (I.S.A’s) – that they control “ (Learning Journal 11.4.93).
In order to determine whether the Project 2000 Curriculum is a vehicle by which the dominant social order seeks to promote its values through its partisans within nurse, education, it is necessary to establish what these values are so that they can be recognised, or not, as essential contents of the Project 2000 Curriculum : If such values were present it would suggest that further enquiry as to whether they are promoted through methods of curriculum delivery suggestive of a deliberate and organised attempt to convey propaganda would be worth while to the focus of this enquiry.
To identify the values of the ‘dominant social order’ (the terminology of today would designate this group the title of ‘the new right’) it is instructive to consider the role that the concept of absolute values played in the metaphysical consideration of Plato. To such as Plato, absolute values are forms of idealism contained in such concepts as ‘goodness’. ‘truth’ and ‘justice’, which are the supreme authority in society because they represent ‘ultimate reality’ and as such, are removed from criticism.
In the hands of ‘the dominant social order ‘ that which, as ‘ultimate reality’ can not be criticised is a tool of social control, requiring a person to associate a course of action with certain absolute values (Schofield, 1973); for instance , a student nurse may encourage a patient to be ‘a productive member of society ‘ if such a prescription represents what the student nurse conceives, through being subject to recent propaganda or, alternatively through developing the prescriptions during an earlier formative period, as representing ‘goodness’, ‘truth’ and ‘justice’.

It may be deduced by analysing the acts of parliament and pronouncements of the present and former conservative government that the focal intent of their policies to foster conception of individuals as inherently being ‘productive’ and ‘independent’ (of the state) members of the society, who must be enabled by government to make choices in the directing of their life (Johnson, Jacobs, 1992).
Is such an ethos represented prominently within the philosophy of the project 2000 curriculum within the Place X nurse education departments’ ‘mission statement’ (Section 13:2): analysis clearly indicates that this is the case. The focal meanings contained within the statement of the curriculum’s philosophy were deduced through the process of engaging in dialogue with colleagues and reflecting on the outcomes. The focal meanings identified are represented by ‘Learning Journal’ statements that patients should engage in :
“Forward movement towards being a creative and constructive individual member of society “ (10.4.93).
With Nurses :
“Facilitating maximum independence “ (20.4.93).
With patients achieving :
“Inherent dignity and irrefutable freedom to make choices “ (20.4.93).
However, whether this singular world-view is represented in the project 2000 curriculum by chance, by it being naturally reflective of widely held beliefs, or by it being the intent of a dominant political order and its partisans to place it there, is open to question in the same way deducing the aetiology of beliefs given by students is. Similarly, neither does the finding (Nightingale, 1993) that the overwhelming majority of literature recommended to students reflects the ‘dominant ‘ paradigm indicate that intentional propaganda is taking place: Nor does the finding (Nightingale, Barnes, 1993) that essays and projects are (necessarily) reflective of ‘new right’ philosophy indicate intent to ‘transmit’ propaganda, Propaganda is not proven by the placement of (‘new right’) ‘political appointees’ (‘company men’, Jackson, 1990) within the higher echelons of nurse education, who:
“Appoint colleagues of similar political stance to fashion the milieu of nurse education colleges”. (Peterow, 1992).
It may be, as colleagues content :
“That the ideology of (‘new right’) ‘freedom’ is not deliberately perpetrated by a group of sinister (wo)men. It is simply generated historically by the changing state of the economy- when there is an economic ‘downswing’ the nursing curriculum reflects ‘the needs of society’. (Learning Journal, 2-/04/93
Other colleagues maintain that the nursing curriculum is generated by a ‘force of ideas’, independent of economic determination, in that :
Changing views on education reflect the spirit of the period in which they come to prominence (Karabel, Helsey, 1977).
My contention is that, when evaluated against the criteria identified in this enquiry, the project 2000 curriculum may not be a vehicle for transmitting propaganda, although there are some grounds to support further enquiry into this proposition.
There are stronger grounds for suggesting that the ‘spirit of the period’ has ‘birthed’ a ‘force of ideas’ (whether of economic aetiology or not) that support an educational milieu in which individual nurse educators promote their beliefs to the exclusion of others, and thus promote the opposition of conscious enquiry :
“Routine and capricious behaviour. The former accepts what has been customary as a full measure of possibility. The latter ignores the connections of our personal action with the energies of the environment “. (Dewey, 1916, p.146)
Such sentiments are echoed in the following ‘focal meanings’ given by the proect 2000 students during th course of discussions in their clinical placement settings. These statements are given with permission:
“Human beings have the right to contribute to the society that feeds them “. (10.10.92)
“The main goal of nursing is to get people back to work and their family as quickly as possible “. (15.04.92)
“People can only achieve dignity and self respect if they are independent of others and free to make choices “. (21.10.92)

It can be seen that the aforementioned statements are all interpretations of absolute values, that is, interpretations of ‘goodness’. ‘truth’ and ‘justice’, reflecting particular (to the dominant social order ) world- view, representative of ‘the protestant work ethic’ and its accompanying value of ‘anti-welfarism’: It is only through this philosophy that ‘freedom’ and ‘independence’ can be gained; account is not taken of patient’s cognitive, economic, physical and spiritual resources to meet such prescriptive goals, certainly not to the degree that any inability to do so would preclude, as of right (of asylum), their eventual/ inevitable ‘facilitation’ into the ‘community’.
“A curriculum that promotes conscious enquiry acknowledges that students engage in a creative enterprise between their self and their environment, co-creating meaning, rather than having meaning imposed into their being through the will of external agencies. That is, a curriculum that promotes conscious enquiry is reflective of the ‘naturalistic’ paradigm”. (Learning Journal , 2.05.93).
It is through such reflection on the themes inherent in this study, which have made me a more insightful contributor to the shaping of my profession’s curriculum ideology, that I feel both my personal and professional development has been enhanced. As Dewey contended,
“All that is the wisest (wo)man can do is observe what is going on more widely and minutely and then select more carefully from what is noted just those factors which point to something to happen”. (Dewey, 1916, p.146).
Lenin Nightingale copyright


empire_propaganda_by_chaotic_harmony                       THE LEADER OF THE NURSING WORLD ORDER

(Classifications of propaganda techniques taken from: Asking the Right Questions; M. Neil Browne & Stuart M. Keeley. How to Think About Weird Things; Theodore Schick & Lewis Vaughn).

“Well you could quote lenin nightingale but … (a slight shaking of the head) … or any other Trotskyist (another slight shaking of the head). Ad Hominem Attack: If you can’t refute the argument, attack the person presenting the argument. The intent is to discredit said person. Note that such an attack does not address the issue at hand (should lenin nightingale’s work be used as reference), but rather constitutes a diversion.

“The head of the RCN would disagree with lenin nightingale”. Appeal to Authority; Some “higher authority” is invoked as evidence in support of a claim.

“Do you really think that lenin nightingale’s plan for all hospitals and nursing homes to be run by committees of workers would be best for nursing?” Appeal to Fear: Propagandists may try to scare you with fearsome predictions of what “the other guy” will do if his plan is adopted.

“Everybody knows that lenin’s plan to abolish the GMC and NMC and replace them with a democratically elected committees run by doctors and nurses is a Trotskyist fantasy”. Appeal to the People: A common fallacy of attempting to support a claim on the basis of popularity. Remember that something that “everybody knows” can be wrong.

“There is a shortage of nurses”. Arguing from Ignorance: A common fallacy of claiming that some hypothesis is true based on lack of information, that being: that there as many nurses who have jumped off the Titanic of Nursing as constitutes the claimed shortage.

“The government have reduced the number of nurse training places, therefore we have a shortage of nurses”.
Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc: A common fallacy. It confuses temporal relation with causation. The fallacy is that since b came after a, then a must have caused b. Consider that there may be several possibilities for what caused b and the time relationship could be just coincidence.

“What lenin suggests would not be supported by Florence Nightingale”. Appeal to Tradition: We’ve always done it this way. That might be true, but it might not constitute a reason to keep doing it this way.

“Nursing either goes down the route carefully planned by the RCN and the NMC or it throws itself off lenin’s cliff”.
This is the False Dichotomy fallacy. It consists of framing the issue to make it appear that there are only two options. One option is made to look terrible, with the implication that the other option presented is the only choice.

“If the RCN conference adopt a motion, then such voices as lenin’s are irrelevant”. Hasty Generalization: Simply look at a small sample of some population then generalize it to the whole population.

“What lenin suggests, ditching revalidation by biased employers, would not solve the problem of loss of trust by the public and government in nursing”. Perfect Solution: This faulty premise makes the claim that, since the proposed action will not solve all of the problem, it is not the desired solution and should be rejected. This is fallacious because most modern problems are complex enough that no single perfect solution exists.

“If we put cameras in all places of nursing, then we are on the road to the complete abandonment of maintaining the dignity of patients”. Slippery Slope: This one is used a lot. It argues that if we do a, then there is nothing to stop b from happening. If we do b, then c must surely follow. Obviously, results a, b, and c are undesirable. The fallacy is used as a reason for not doing a. The flaw is that there is usually no causal connection between a, b, and c.

“If we abandon nursing as a degree profession, as lenin suggests, then … Straw Man: The user of this tactic invents some misleading picture of an opponent’s ideas so that the fake view can be knocked down easily. Since the original idea has been misrepresented and distorted, the audience may think that the original idea has been knocked down when only the fake straw man view has been hit.
lenin nightingale 2015



Brian Milligan (13 November 2015, recently wrote about a vulture capitalist scam sold as care. He mentioned the ‘exit fees’ paid by residents of so-called retirement villages: ‘The exit fee depends on how long a resident has lived in the village, but is typically capped at 10% of the original purchase price. However in some cases it can be as high as 30%, after just three years’. But don’t worry folks: ‘The Law Commission is currently investigating this issue, and a fortnight ago declared that such fees are causing “anger and distress”. Milligan gives an example of typical costs:

Retirement Village typical costs
Apartment purchase price (leasehold) £250,000)
Exit fee after ten years (10% cap) £25,000
Annual ground rent £150
Annual rent (alternative to buying) £7,000
Annual service charge £6,000
Care charges (based on 13.5 hours care a week) £6,800
Base: Mid market provider. 2 bedroom apartment

This is just another importation of American crap! They have perfected this rip-off scheme in Australia. Alan Kohler (9 Jul 2014, spills the hard beans on what the UK version of the scam of the century will hold for retirees: ‘The way most of these things operate is as crooked as bank-owned financial planning and property spruiking. In fact, retirement villages and aged care accommodation are the progeny of the worst of both’. Hard stuff this, which wouldn’t get a sniff by the BBC. ‘Too biased, old boy’, meaning we can’t upset the ruling class and their parasitic buddies.

Alan Kohler strides on: ‘The industry is a booming national disgrace, with three very juicy rackets: deferred fees, ongoing fees that keep going when you die, and bonds.

Taking them one at a time, deferred fees are where you buy a unit in a retirement village at full price, but when the time comes to sell you have to pay the village owner a large percentage of what you get.

One village that I’m familiar with requires 25 per cent of the original purchase price to be paid to the owner, plus 75 per cent of any capital gain. Others simply take 30 per cent of the sale price – 3 per cent a year for a maximum of 10 years.

There are a variety of deferred fee schemes contained in retirement village contracts and they all rely on the fact that when an elderly couple signs it, they tend not to pay much attention to what might happen to the assets when they die.

This is dead right. The easiest dopes to rope are the elderly, and their loving relatives, who just wish to ‘pass the problem on’. Kohler continues: ‘They usually don’t get legal advice and don’t really understand that the village owner, typically a property development company, will get a “deferred fee” of more than $100,000 when it’s time to move on to the next phase of life, or death. On top of the gouge known as “deferred fees”, there are the non-deferred fees – ongoing management fees, usually $100 and $200 a week, but sometimes more’.

These scavenging scum even feed off the dead. ‘But the best thing about the management fees is that they don’t stop when you move out or die and your unit is empty, the garden unadmired and the bowling green not used, by you – it only stops when the unit is sold. And since the village owner is often the selling agent, this can, and often does, take a long time. The children of deceased unit owners have found themselves having to pay crushing management fees for months, sometimes years, on top of the funeral expenses and their grief’.

This obnoxious scam is just another version of how care is being turned into couldn’t give a damn about ripping you off. The profit has gone in the care industry for the working class. The vultures are leaving, as I predicted 20 years ago, and now only want to feed on richer bodies. It’s like lions sizing up a lame, old zebra, which has plenty of belly fat. They are licking their lips, whilst ‘propaganderment’ calls it something like another choice in the health care menu.

It’s like ordering a piece of chicken labelled ‘coq-au-salmonella’.

We’ll only take a pint of your blood now, we’ll drain you of the rest later!

A form of deferred vampirism!

Down with these property development cronies of government.

Make all care free in a Revolutionary New World Order.
lenin nightingale 2015

Nurses Trying to Nurse–

In  response to the  number of nurses who challenge the NMC  regarding their procedures of questioning Fitness to Practise, and the grounds upon which some accusations are founded;

we circulate the following helpful sites. Some of them  will assist with the development of a more recent site should anybdoy be able to do it. Others are legal services.

There are of course, similar issues within the USA and Australia  regarding their nurse registration bodies, and it is not soley confined to nursing.

With acknowledgement to nurses who presently challenge their case, in particular Ann Ditch and David Dickinson who may both be found on twitter.


Example  cases with unexpected outcomes –


nurse-requirements-600x450I remember reading a 2008 American study, ‘Nurses Working Outside of Nursing’, which showed that of the 2.9 million registered nurses in the United States, 16.3% were either not working, or not working in nursing. It is true, people in general make wrong career choices, decide to bail out and move on, but nursing is right at the top of ‘lifeboat’ jobs. Another American study, by the Association of Colleges of Nursing (2007), estimated that 13% of newly licensed RN’s ‘jumped shift’ after just one year, and over one third were thinking about following them.

The reasons never change. Long hours, and fear of management phone call to ‘man the deck’. Stress – many nurses feel like crying at the end of their shift, or have sleepless nights worrying whether they have ordered necessary tests, etc. Undesirable working conditions – new nurses are often made to ‘swab the decks’ by the shift’s captains; forced to juggle the needs of many patients, and make critical decisions when not equipped to do so. They can be ignored, or
told to “toughen up”, to make them “better nurses”. Insufficient staffing – a 2005 study by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing found the obvious – over 90% of nurses thought staffing shortages would lead to nurses bailing out.

So it is in the UK: Whatever plagues American nursing experiences are inevitably visited on the UK. The government jobsworths piloting ‘reforms’ in the NHS are merely copyists of the American ‘cost-is king-in-care’ ideology. In fact, it gets rather boring to read of new American ‘initiatives’ in health care, knowing they are inevitably going to be served up in the UK under a different name – the difference betwen French fries and pomme frites, both fried potato.

Nursing schools are trying to supply their industry with enough nurses to fill the ranks. There is no shortage of nurses, there is a shortage of nurses who want to stay in nursing. Many leave, and many that do not only stay because of economic necessity, often resenting their job and their patients. Yes, dearhearts, some resentful nurses abuse patients.

Nursing workforce projections indicate the RN shortage in America may exceed 500,000 by 2025 (American Association of Colleges of Nursing, 2010). The RCN in the UK constantly bleat about a shortage of nurses, about how enough are not being trained, but never consider the percentage of nurse entrants that (a) leave before completing their course, (b) stay in nursing after completing their course, (c) remain in nursing after 5 years. A + B + c = more than any ‘shortage’.

It’s all a scam, dearhearts. The nursing industry perpetuates itself by churning out new recruits to relpace their ‘lost comrades’, who may have won a few medals on the way, but just ended up choking on them.

Only an idiot could imagine nursing as a 25 year, mortgage paying career.

Only an idiot would expect not to suffer feelings of hopelessness and emotional distress, and calling in sick.

Only an idiot would believe ‘management’ to be on their side, and not that of the masters (not patients) they serve.

Nursing has just become an ‘attract an idiot’ game, run for the benefit of those that service the production line.

Shortage of nurses?

Total Crap!

The same situation haunts doctors.

‘Earlier this month I attended a conference on physician well-being at the Massachusetts Medical Society where I heard an alarming statistic: the suicide rate among women physicians is more than two times that of women in the general population. …  I no longer believe it was weakness or selfishness that led me to abandon clinical practice. I believe it was self-preservation. I knew I didn’t have the stamina and single-mindedness to try to provide high-quality, compassionate care within the existing environment. Perhaps, due to temperament or timing, I was less immune than others to the stresses of practicing medicine in a health care system that often seemed blind to humanness, both mine and my patients’ (Diane Shannon,

She spoke for all.

The solution.  A revolution in which the lie of budgets is binned and patient care is placed in  in the hands of doctors and nurses.

lenin nightingale 2015