Ship of Fools: Nurse disciplined for praying with patients

Thread: Nurse disciplined for praying with patients Board: Purgatory / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=020134

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

Report on tribunal after sacking

This story has two different versions, that of the patients who complained, and that of the nurse who does not feel she did anything wrong, even after not following instructions to desist.

What the article does not say is that the spokesperson for the Christian Legal Centre told the TV that it was an issue about freedom, the freedom of the nurse to be the person she was and express her faith as she felt fit. (Paraphrase.)

My feeling was that the CLC seemed to miss the issue of the freedom of the patients not to be proselytised while awaiting surgery.

I don't think these cases do the faith much good.

Posted by Garden Hermit (# 109) on :

Is it Racist to say that Black Christians are much more vocal about their Faith than anyone else ? I have met several and I am bowled over by their enthusiasm. Is this more a Cultural thing than Religious ?

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

No.

A patient is vulnerable and this vulnerability should never be used by nurses or anyone else whose job it is to care for them.

They are 'using' the patient to satisfy their religious feelings/urges and or their need to evangelise - probably many other reasons too, but it's wrong imo

Posted by Ethne Alba (# 5804) on :

Read on from the headlines!

A closer look at the issue shows that the nurse in question did not Only offer to pray with patients in her care. Sadly it is reported that this nurse also apparently told at least one that they would be more likely to get better if they prayed.

To have two or three complaints against a nurse is unusual. But to have EIGHT?

It's sad.
Sad that the trust felt that she could not continue working with advice and guidance. But obviously they felt that a line had been crossed.
.
.

[ 30. March 2017, 18:25: Message edited by: Ethne Alba ]

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
Is it Racist to say that Black Christians are much more vocal about their Faith than anyone else ? I have met several and I am bowled over by their enthusiasm. Is this more a Cultural thing than Religious ?

If you think it is because of their colour, then yes. I've met exceedingly pale, excessively vocal Christians. And I've met very repressed Christians who are black.
And, BTW, there is no black culture in any monolithic sense.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

It is unfortunate that she did not respond properly to progressive discipline. Is she doing the martyr and "I've been oppressed" schtick? Many religious people, Christian and other, don't impose and quietly set a Christian example by their lives. She is completely out of line.

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

I venture to disagree. I find it both suspicious and disturbing that the people mangers seem to pick on in these sort of cases always seem to be ethnic, female, or in this case, both. Odd, or one could say, fishy.

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

I would say the sample size is too small to demonstrate the ethnicity or gender is significant.

Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :

Sounds like she was over the line. If I were a patient in the hospital awaiting surgery, I'd feel very uncomfortable if my nurse asked me to pray with her.

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

It wasn't in her job description.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

Even after you follow the link to the previous story, there are bits missing from the newspaper articles. Here's an attempt to fill in some gaps, and to sketch how the story might go.

The NHS has a central guideline document called Religion or Belief, which addresses all kinds of issues around faith in healthcare. It's readily available online as a pdf file. It came out in 2009, so no NHS institution has any excuse for not having built it into its own policies around recruitment, working practice, patient care and so on. Furthermore, every NHS Trust should have access to chaplains who can advise on these issues before anything silly happens.

Now, if a patient asks a nurse to pray with them, there's rarely a problem about that. But in almost all circumstances, a nurse may not proactively offer to pray with a patient. It is not part of the nursing role, and could be interpreted as emotional or psychological abuse. I said "almost all circumstances" - there are a few nurses who are also chaplains, but there should always be clarity about roles, boundaries, and suchlike. What is absolutely out of order in all circumstances is to claim any curative properties for the prayer. I would expect such a claim to immediately become a disciplinary matter.

If a case like this had come up at a hospital where I worked, it would have been expected that I, as a chaplain, would be involved in the nurse's supervision and education after the first instance. My role would have been to help her understand patients' vulnerabilities, and the nature and extent of professional boundaries. I would also have had a conversation with her about possible appropriate outlets for her expressions of faith in the workplace.

Even if all of the foregoing goes well, there's always a chance of further complaints. And here comes the point, I'm afraid, where patients have to be protected from such intrusion even at the expense of a talented nurse's job.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

Out of interest, what happens if the chaplain and the patient share a particular belief that certain religious actions are curative*?

Is it just that such a person would not be employed by the NHS as a chaplain? What if they were a volunteer - does that make any difference?

*maybe the use of some kind of religious oil..?

[ 30. March 2017, 19:25: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Out of interest, what happens if the chaplain and the patient share a particular belief that certain religious actions are curative*?

Is it just that such a person would not be employed by the NHS as a chaplain? What if they were a volunteer - does that make any difference?

*maybe the use of some kind of religious oil..?

If it ain't approved by NICE (National Institute for Health & Care Excellence), you can't claim it's a cure! You can claim that spiritual "techniques" - including Christian sacraments - can help, but you can't claim they'll cure.

I don't think I've ever come across a chaplain who would claim a curative effect for what they do. Ministers visiting from outside, however, can sometimes be a right pain in the gluteus maximus.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

A local fundamentalist group fell foul of the law by distributing information leaflets about their activities. They claimed to be able to 'cure' autism... [Eek!]

As a vulnerable patient, last year, awaiting brain surgery, I'm not sure how I would have felt if one of the nursing staff offered to pray with or for me. Possibly, I would have welcomed it, but to be told, in effect, that prayer would ensure my survival and recovery more likely would have spooked me.

Thanks are due to Adeodatus for sharing with us the NHS' sensible approach to this sort of thing. Sadly, the nurse in this case - and doubtless she is entirely sincere in her faith and beliefs - did not take the sensible approach.

IJ

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

Thanks Adeodatus, how does that work? A nurse being asked to pray by a patient? What about a consultant? Either way?

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Thanks Adeodatus, how does that work? A nurse being asked to pray by a patient? What about a consultant? Either way?

It's not all that common, and rarer with doctors than with nurses. The nurse-patient relationship is an extraordinarily intimate one on all sorts of levels (and that's precisely why it has to be so carefully conducted). It's the nurse who's most likely to be there when the patient talks about their anxiety at 3am, and the nurse who may well be trusted with the simple request "Will you say a prayer with me?" It's a mark of great trust on the part of the patient.

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :

Has the Christian Legal Centre ever won a case?

Call me Mr Cynical, but ISTM they deliberately pick indefensible cases so that when they inevitably lose, they can cite their loss as further evidence that Christians are a persecuted minority.

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Thanks Adeodatus, how does that work? A nurse being asked to pray by a patient? What about a consultant? Either way?
It's not all that common, and rarer with doctors than with nurses. The nurse-patient relationship is an extraordinarily intimate one on all sorts of levels (and that's precisely why it has to be so carefully conducted). It's the nurse who's most likely to be there when the patient talks about their anxiety at 3am, and the nurse who may well be trusted with the simple request "Will you say a prayer with me?" It's a mark of great trust on the part of the patient.

I'm impressed at the wisdom of that. By the state. I hope strident secularists leave it alone. I imagine it happens between Muslim and Hindu nurses and patients too.

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :

I imagine that a nurse or a doctor who prayed privately in his or her home for their patients would be ok.

I remember when there was a similar kerfluffle about teachers praying in public schools. I read an article from a Christian teacher who stated that she did indeed pray for her students in private and at home . But on the job, she knew that her duty was to be professional and respect the secular nature of the public school system and not impose her religious beliefs on anyone.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

My late father's cardiac surgeon went to mass on his way to the hospital every morning to pray for his patients. Then he went to the hospital and went to work.

I don't work in a secular university, so I'm able to pray any time I want. But I often don't think it's appropriate or want to pray in a specific way for a specific student about matters that can't be disclosed. I don't find it hard to "pray on the go"-- silently praying on the train to work or even as I'm setting up the classroom & loading my ppt.

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

In December I had my knee replaced. I have known the Orthopedic Surgeon for years. I knew he was a man of faith. So it did not surprise me, during pre-op, when he came in to see if I was prepared and he asked if I would appreciate a prayer. I agreed. Can't remember the prayer, but I do remember it helped to settle some of the nervousness I was feeling.

As I recall, though, he did not imply my recovery would be better with a prayer than if I had refused the prayer. This appears to be the downfall of the nurse. She was implying the patients would have a better chance of survival if they allowed her to pray with them.

Someone above said prayers or sacraments do not cure. I would rather keep an open mind about that.

As a seminary student, I did a clinical pastoral education quarter at a hospital. One evening I was called to the prenatal ward. When I arrivedI was ushered into a room in which several medical personnel were trying to work with a woman who was six months pregnant and had a urinary track infection. The infection was causing her to have a high temperature and she was hallucinating.

She claimed she was seeing Jesus in the room. She knew Jesus was coming to take her home (heaven). She wanted to be baptized.

My goal was to try to help the medical staff get her to calm down, but she was panicking even hyperventilating. Finally, I said I would baptize her. Immediately after the baptism, her fever broke and she calmed down. I stayed with her and her family for about a half hour, leaving when she was finally asleep.

Did the baptism cure? I can't say it didn't. It certainly helped reduce her anxiety and it allowed the medical interventions to work.

Of course, since this was a city hospital, she was discharged the very next day and I never saw her again.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
I imagine that a nurse or a doctor who prayed privately in his or her home for their patients would be ok.

No problem at all. Your home, your time, your rules. But if there are other people present, patient confidentiality must be respected. It's nobody else's business that you're in hospital.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

To me, there are few things more annoying that someone asking if they can mumble religious invectives over me. I wouldn't expect an accountant or a decorator to ask that, why would I want a nurse or doctor to do it in a circumstance where I didn't have the strength to say no?

Can I give you some unwanted, unasked for, words I think are divine? No, piss off. If you really have to mumble that nonsense, do it in the privacy of your own head, not invading mine.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
To me, there are few things more annoying that someone asking if they can mumble religious invectives over me. I wouldn't expect an accountant or a decorator to ask that, why would I want a nurse or doctor to do it in a circumstance where I didn't have the strength to say no?

Can I give you some unwanted, unasked for, words I think are divine? No, piss off. If you really have to mumble that nonsense, do it in the privacy of your own head, not invading mine.

My former chaplaincy colleagues know that if I ever end up in their hospital as a patient, they're among the ever-reducing small number of clergy I'd trust to know the difference between their arse and their elbow, let alone pray for me.

[ 31. March 2017, 09:09: Message edited by: Adeodatus ]

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Out of interest, what happens if the chaplain and the patient share a particular belief that certain religious actions are curative*?

Is it just that such a person would not be employed by the NHS as a chaplain? What if they were a volunteer - does that make any difference?

*maybe the use of some kind of religious oil..?

I remember being told by a former nurse, who was looking after a young mother on her ward that she was so upset by her plight - she looked to be dying - that when she was on the night shift she took the opportunity afforded by solitude in the midst of sleep to anoint the woman with the oil consecrated for the purpose. The young woman subsequently recovered - make of that what you will.

But she was quite aware that her actions were entirely inappropriate on a professional level - her emotions and her faith had got the better of her judgement. It's not fair to impose your views on someone who can't object or who could object but is in a position of vulnerability.

Posted by Mark Wuntoo (# 5673) on :

I have had a number of conversations with my GP about faith. He knows that I have given up my belief. We have sometimes pulled each other's leg. He is a pentecostalist. On my last visit he told me that he was praying for me. I gave a suitable (for me) response. I did not tell him that he was wasting his time but I did not thank him. I was a bit surprised but not offended. I sort of respect him for it as I know he is being kind. But if he asked me if he could pray with me I'd probably change my GP - I know he won't do that. As has been stated, praying on one's own for someone is very different to praying with that person. And I wouldn't be surprised if my GP reads this post. [Eek!]

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
My former chaplaincy colleagues know that if I ever end up in their hospital as a patient, they're among the ever-reducing small number of clergy I'd trust to know the difference between their arse and their elbow, let alone pray for me.

Chaplains are a bit different. I can imagine chatting to a chaplain about various things that I wouldn't want to talk to a nurse about - but even there I'd be uncomfortable about having them "pray over me".

I realise I have a bit of a phobia about this kind of prayer altogether.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I remember being told by a former nurse, who was looking after a young mother on her ward that she was so upset by her plight - she looked to be dying - that when she was on the night shift she took the opportunity afforded by solitude in the midst of sleep to anoint the woman with the oil consecrated for the purpose. The young woman subsequently recovered - make of that what you will.

But she was quite aware that her actions were entirely inappropriate on a professional level - her emotions and her faith had got the better of her judgement. It's not fair to impose your views on someone who can't object or who could object but is in a position of vulnerability.

This is why my faith is in tatters. I'd be lovely if oil anointing had some verifiable medical properties. It'd be lovely if it was really true that Christians had some kind of unquestionable power of healing - like some kind of superheroes striding through the land.

I'm afraid I don't believe it. Christians have no intrinsic power to heal.

So at best anointing with oil is a psychological comfort to the person who is sick (providing that this is part of their religious tradition and it is meaningful for them).

Most of the time, such as in the situation you mention above, it is just abusive.

Fortunately, I suppose, in this situation there is no real harm done.

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

@mr cheesy. Bliss. I never respond to offers of magic incantations in group. I make orthogonal offerings. An ever more loved charevo asst. vicar wants to be kept informed of my condition 'to know what to pray for'. I'll tolerate that for now.

@Gramps49. My mind is completely closed therefore. To random magic. I have great faith in placebo. I do seek courage and wisdom and acceptance and faith and strength and compassion ... nearly as hopelessly! But it does create space.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

The very simple thing to bear in mind is, if you're having a conversation with a patient who's lying in a hospital bed, they can't walk out.

Posted by Garden Hermit (# 109) on :

It today's PC World in which you can't say anything out Loud without offending someone else, you she have known better. She should have stuck to the Internet where you can say anything however nasty and untrue and hurtful about anyone you fancy.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
I have had a number of conversations with my GP about faith. He knows that I have given up my belief. We have sometimes pulled each other's leg. He is a pentecostalist. On my last visit he told me that he was praying for me. I gave a suitable (for me) response. I did not tell him that he was wasting his time but I did not thank him. I was a bit surprised but not offended. I sort of respect him for it as I know he is being kind. But if he asked me if he could pray with me I'd probably change my GP - I know he won't do that. As has been stated, praying on one's own for someone is very different to praying with that person. And I wouldn't be surprised if my GP reads this post.

I suppose if one doesn't believe that prayer has any effect, in and of itself, the believer might think that there isn't anything to be offended by it - the non-believer thinks it is just words, so what's the harm?

And I think one can on some level rationalise it. This person cares about me and is doing something which is meaningful to them. OK.

I suppose the problem is that this still feels like abuse to me. Too often it is being used as some kind of emotional blackmail, a form of spiritual-sounding gossip or one-up-manship.

If you're praying, pray. Don't tell me, I don't give a shit. Go to your little room, close the door, draw the curtains and pray - or do whatever other rituals you think are necessary. I don't know or care what they are.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
It today's PC World in which you can't say anything out Loud without offending someone else, you she have known better. She should have stuck to the Internet where you can say anything however nasty and untrue and hurtful about anyone you fancy.

I'd gently suggest you might want to stand for a few minutes at a bus-stop in my Welsh valley. I would be amazed if someone didn't come up to you and start talking about something entirely random and quite possibly offensive.

The idea that there is some kind of "PC World" where people can't say things in public is totally bogus.

Posted by Mark Wuntoo (# 5673) on :

Some people even pray for their pastor's wife to rise from the dead.

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :

I believe that praying for someone is a way, primarily of expressing love and concern for that person, and not necessarily about fixing or curing a person. In that sense, I don't see prayer as being futile.

A secular example that my nonreligious friends might say to me if I was in a hospital would be "good thoughts/positive feelings to you." I don't believe that good thoughts from another person magically cures my ailment, but I take them as expressions of care and love.

I know that an atheist critic of Christianity might view this approach as a copout, of sidestepping the question of whether or not God does actually answer prayer and directly intervene in medical situations.

To return to the OP, the nurse or doctor is expected to act in a professional manner and do his or her job. The nurse is free to express her religious convictions and spiritual practices on her own time, in her home and in her church. As a professional, however, she should be sensitive to the secular and pluralist nature of the workplace.

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
It today's PC World in which you can't say anything out Loud without offending someone else, you she have known better. She should have stuck to the Internet where you can say anything however nasty and untrue and hurtful about anyone you fancy.

Well, medical professionals are expected to watch what they say. I know from a friend who works in a downtown hospital, that the emergency ward on a Saturday night is full of people who have injured themselves or become sick due to drinking a bit too much. It would be highly unprofessional for the nurse to say "You drunken idiot, you should have known better", though of course, I imagine that that is what they have been thinking.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I venture to disagree. I find it both suspicious and disturbing that the people mangers seem to pick on in these sort of cases always seem to be ethnic, female, or in this case, both. Odd, or one could say, fishy.

Male nurses may be a minority (still) so it’s possible that will be reflected in the number of cases that go to tribunal.

When you read the small print in these kinds of cases, they’ve been lost because of the behaviour of the plaintiff. They’ve done something contrary to the rules, they’ve been called on it after complaints, been told to stop and they haven’t. You don’t get to play by different rules to everyone else “because you’re a Christian”. The CLC then squawks about persecution – which doesn’t help anyone.

Tubbs

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

I was also contemplating whether there is some deliberate choice of cases that the CLC take on and which therefore get publicity.

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :

Originally posted by Mr Cheesy:

quote:
This is why my faith is in tatters. I'd be lovely if oil anointing had some verifiable medical properties. It'd be lovely if it was really true that Christians had some kind of unquestionable power of healing - like some kind of superheroes striding through the land.

I don't believe that oil has verifiable medical properties, and neither did she, which was why she did it at 3am sub-rosa, and not in consultation with other medical professionals. As I said, it was a lapse of judgement, and as you said, no harm was done.

Personally, I'm grateful that Christians aren't superheroes - much as I have often wished for a magic wand to solve other peoples problems - based on my experience of church life we'd be less like the Golden Age Superman, who was always good noble and true, and more likely to end up drunk on power. If miracles do happen, they happen as a result of holiness, which is presumably why they are rare, and not because God is some kind of supernatural battery that you can plug yourself into by saying the sinners prayer.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I was also contemplating whether there is some deliberate choice of cases that the CLC take on and which therefore get publicity.

I doubt they would say so. The rest of us may well suspect it.

Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on :

Tangent //
My daughter was born with a "lucky caul." The midwife took the caul, split it in two and prepared it so that she and I could keep them as lucky charms. I was rather startled by this! In the event I neglected it, let it dry out and then binned it, but I assume she still has hers; she told me that it was her tenth charm.

I guess that there's a limited window of opportunity to make a charm, and she erred on the side of caution and just made it. I wish I'd paid a bit more attention now and looked after it, as my daughter would have liked it.

I wonder if anyone ever objects to having bits of tissue made into lucky charms?

// End tangent.

Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on :

(I would have taken more care of it had I read David Copperfield and realised it had a literary curiosity value, or indeed, had I not been preoccupied with caring for a newborn.)

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :

Many thanks, Adeodatus, for your very helpful contribution to this thread.

My nonconformist instincts tell me that there is not much of an argument re individual conscience or religious freedom to justify the appeal. As Claire Short once put it, "Of course you are free to disobey as a matter of conscience, and of course you are free to accept the consequences. And you are also free to argue for changes to laws you regard as oppressive. But don't mix those things up in attempting to justify your actions."

Something to that effect anyway. You can't expect to keep your job by ignoring a formal warning. While you still have a job, you can challenge an HR ruling. But if you want to keep your job, you desist from the behaviour which got you into hot water while the appeal is ongoing. If you lose your appeal, you have two options. Put up with it, or resign.

The nurse wanted it both ways. Which shows a certain arrogance. 'The rules don't apply to me, I serve a higher power'. Who was noted for His encouragement of humility.

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

@mr cheesy. My favourite kind of faith. Like Old Glory shot to hell over Gettysburg.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I was also contemplating whether there is some deliberate choice of cases that the CLC take on and which therefore get publicity.

Are you suggesting that they are cases mainstream law firms and unions won't touch with a bargepole?

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

I have no idea. But it is quite striking that so many of their cases look so similar.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I was also contemplating whether there is some deliberate choice of cases that the CLC take on and which therefore get publicity.
Are you suggesting that they are cases mainstream law firms and unions won't touch with a bargepole?

More that they take cases that can be used to support a particular line of argument. It's hard to know whether other firms or unions would take them. They might well - but not argue them in the same way in court.

Tubbs

Posted by Callan (# 525) on :

IANAL, but I wouldn't be surprised if your average solicitor, confronted by something like this, would go for some kind of deal on the QT involving a severance payment and a neutralish reference for the future whereas the CLC would go for a blaze of publicity and a "sorry, we did our best" when it all went TU.

Ironic really, the nurse was sacked for making "God will cure you" assertions that couldn't be backed up and the CLC offered "You will be vindicated in court" assertions that also couldn't be backed up. The perfect lawyer-client combination.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

Good riddance to her for being so unprofessional.

As for the Christian Legal Centre, they're a bunch of fruitcakes defending fruitcakes.

Posted by Garden Hermit (# 109) on :

I suppose praying for you is better than getting fired up and setting off to Syria to fight with ISIS.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
I suppose praying for you is better than getting fired up and setting off to Syria to fight with ISIS.

What a stupid thing to say which would make no sense when talking about anything else.

"Oh well, at least she's not doing this other really dumb thing. She's not a serial killer, so let's forget that she's stolen £5 from an old lady."

Posted by Garden Hermit (# 109) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
I suppose praying for you is better than getting fired up and setting off to Syria to fight with ISIS.
What a stupid thing to say which would make no sense when talking about anything else.

"Oh well, at least she's not doing this other really dumb thing. She's not a serial killer, so let's forget that she's stolen £5 from an old lady."

Its meant to show that when some people get 'religion' they do lots of things which are 'not normal'.

Christians these days do things which are much less violent than Muslims - although it wasn't too long ago the situation was reversed.

Posted by Garden Hermit (# 109) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:

quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
I suppose praying for you is better than getting fired up and setting off to Syria to fight with ISIS.
What a stupid thing to say which would make no sense when talking about anything else.

"Oh well, at least she's not doing this other really dumb thing. She's not a serial killer, so let's forget that she's stolen £5 from an old lady."

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:

Christians these days do things which are much less violent than Muslims - although it wasn't too long ago the situation was reversed.

I've had Muslim colleagues tell me that they were praying for me, and I'm happy for them to do so (and to tell me) even though I think they're wrong about God.

I have never had anyone offer to commit an act of terror on my behalf.

Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :

quote:
Christians these days do things which are much less violent than Muslims

Yeah, they just bomb abortion clinics and shoot doctors. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemr:

quote:
Christians these days do things which are much less violent than Muslims
Yeah, they just bomb abortion clinics and shoot doctors.

One thing I noted is that in the media, people don't really talk about religious affiliation when white Anglo-saxons commit illicit acts. No one talks about Christians for example, driving drunk, or joining gangs, though presumably there are drunk drivers and gang members who might have been baptized/have a residual Christian identity.

Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on :

One thing that none of you seem to have picked up on is that this nurses' job was actually to help patients fill in a form, on which was the question that asked what their religion was.

As far as I can tell from watching an interview with the lady, the religious conversation stemmed from the filling in of the form and specifically that question. It's not that she asked the patients if she could pray with them out of the blue!

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:

quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
Is it Racist to say that Black Christians are much more vocal about their Faith than anyone else ? I have met several and I am bowled over by their enthusiasm. Is this more a Cultural thing than Religious ?
If you think it is because of their colour, then yes. I've met exceedingly pale, excessively vocal Christians. And I've met very repressed Christians who are black.
And, BTW, there is no black culture in any monolithic sense.

I think there's certainly a cultural issue here, but perhaps more specifically a West African Christian one.

If this woman had mixed more widely she'd know full well that religion is a private matter here, and the indigenous population don't generally want strangers to offer to pray with them (maybe for them, but even that's very touch and go).

We don't know how long this woman has been in the UK, though. One study I heard about said that the faith of Africans who'd been in the UK for many years was more restrained than that of those who'd been here for a shorter time. If she's been here for decades then she's certainly missed the memo.

I don't know why her previous warnings didn't get through to her, but I hope she finds a more suitable setting soon.

Posted by Ethne Alba (# 5804) on :

Medford, there is filling in forms....and filling in forms.

I have filled many of those forms and i fail to see how i could end up with a conversation like the one talked about , up thread.

However much i Might want to talk endlessly about My Own Opinions of prayer, as a member of the nursing team there is a form to be filled in and (lots of) work to do.

.
.
.

[ 03. April 2017, 18:07: Message edited by: Ethne Alba ]

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :

Yesterday I overheard, unvoluntarily, just such a conversation associated with form filling. It went from discussing wish for resuscitation to had the patient thought about what would happen after death (cremation), to did she wish to speak with the chaplaincy team at all. All based on the patient's responses, and never going anywhere about the person filling the (assumed) form in. Quite proper, and I couldn't see how it could develop into the direction it did with the nurse in the story.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

When a patient is admitted to hospital, it's common for a few questions to be asked so that the patient can have access to spiritual care. But I can't imagine a way through those questions that leads to "Would you like me to pray for you?"

The problem is, spiritual care in the NHS is still a bit of a mess. If a Trust is supportive of it, funds a professional spiritual care team, and acts on their advice, then things like this really needn't happen. But there are still places where spiritual care isn't properly funded, isn't given much attention by management, and isn't involved in things like staff training.

There are guidelines - including some published by NICE - which, if followed, would make situations like this vanishingly improbable. I'm not saying this Trust wasn't following guidelines, but when I hear stories like this, my antennae twitch, and in the past have often twitched with a degree of justification. Under NICE guidelines, nursing staff are to have some basic working knowledge of religion and spirituality; be able to have conversations at the level of conducting an assessment of patients' need; and know how and when to refer a patient to the care of the spiritual care team. The last point is crucial. What it isn't, is chaplains taking all spiritual care out of everyone else's hands and saying that nurses mustn't have any ingoing role in it. What it is, is chaplains being involved above a certain basic level so that conversations, offers of prayer, and suchlike, are carried out with a degree of sensitivity whose need may not always be apparent to inexperienced or untrained staff.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

I suppose I can see how this might happen and how the nurse might feel that this was the Right Thing to do.

Someone arrives who is very sick, the nurse is the only person about (and isn't able to get hold of a chaplain), the patient is upset and the nurse feels (for whatever reason) that she has something religiously in common.

So I'm imagining that the nurse is a Sikh, the patient is a really sick person who is obviously a religious Sikh. The nearest Sikh chaplain is in bed, and it isn't easy to call whoever-it-is that might be appropriate. The patient is upset and the nurse wants to give some comforting spiritual words from that shared religious experience.

I think we might think in that circumstance that whispering something to the patient which calms them from their own religious tradition was unfortunate, but understandable, given the circumstances. Particularly if the effect was to bring some comfort to him.

The problem might be that if someone imagines that this - probably unusual and unlikely scenario - is somehow acceptable then much more mundane daily offers of prayer are appropriate for the nurse. And the lines get blurred, within the nurse's head if nowhere else.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

Moreover, if the patient thought it was an OK thing to do and it was the employer who saw it as problematic, I can see how the nurse might feel aggrieved.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

Freedom of religion has to mean freedom from religion as well, the freedom to not have a religion.

And more importantly the freedom to not have the religion of others imposed on you, whether you have one of your own or not. There is something very off putting about a person saying that THEIR freedom of religion extends so far as to make a significant intrusion into the very personal psychological space of another person.

More than anything, it's very difficult for a person in this sort of situation, when asked "can I pray for you?", to turn around and say no. How do you reject an offer from a nurse who is entrusted with your care?

To me, that difficulty is a significant reason why the question shouldn't be asked in the first place. It becomes a situation where the nurse is comfortable and happy at the expense of the patient.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

I agree and I said as much above. But I was trying to reflect and get into the mindset of why the nurse might think this was appropriate.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

You're right, orfeo - even in deliciously irreligious Britain, refusing an offer of prayer is as difficult as saying you hate puppies. Besides, there are other factors such as the professional-patient relationship and the "sanctity" or otherwise of the patient's room or bed space - it all contributes to a very tricky dynamic, and nurses should understand that they're in a position of considerable "clout" in any conversation with a patient.

But you're right, too, mr cheesy - if no spiritual care professional can be got hold of, then of course the ward staff should do their best, and I would certainly be on the side of a nurse who'd found herself in that position. Minority faith groups who don't have formal representation on the spiritual care team are always at a disadvantage, because the situation you describe does happen: a need is expressed, but no faith representative can be got hold of. That situation is one of the regular "heartsink" moments of whoever's job it is to make spiritual care happen.

Posted by Garden Hermit (# 109) on :

Another 'difficult situation' is when someone tells you they have been bereaved. No-one knows what to say these days, and says nothing, and when they see the other person again deliberately cross the road to avoid another difficult conversation.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Yes indeed - but that's perhaps a topic for another thread.

If, OTOH, a nurse is told by a patient that they (the patient) have recently been bereaved, an appropriate response might be 'I'm sorry to hear that. Would you like to talk about it?', without offering prayer or whatever.

Just a thought.

IJ

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
One thing that none of you seem to have picked up on is that this nurses' job was actually to help patients fill in a form, on which was the question that asked what their religion was.

As far as I can tell from watching an interview with the lady, the religious conversation stemmed from the filling in of the form and specifically that question. It's not that she asked the patients if she could pray with them out of the blue!

Filling in the form was her job. Preaching her version of the gospel - to a patient - wasn't. So all the more reason for the nurse to make sure she didn't blur boundary lines.

They are the patients - vulnerable and unable to get away from someone preaching about how much more likely it is they'll get healed if they pray. Which is another way of saying: if you don't pray, you're more likely to die.

Would you really want to be in the hands of someone who doesn't even exercise common-sense boundaries? How would you like your sick, possibly dying relative to have to cope with a conversation like that right before surgery, in a situation where they don't have the physical capacity to remove themselves from the situation?

She may have possessed some compassion but her over-riding actions here were motivated by her personal driver to fulfil her own vision of faith regardless of whether it was invited or welcomed. In any other context it would be called insensitivity and arrogance.

I personally would've been appalled and very angry for anyone - even a chaplain - to have told me what she told that patient. She should have known better.

(ETA: better grammar!)

[ 04. April 2017, 13:50: Message edited by: Anselmina ]

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

Anselmina, what did you make of my thought experiment regarding a Sikh nurse above? Did that make you equally angry?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

On that subject (and it's an interesting question), how would a devout Sikh nurse know that her Sikh patient was equally devout? I dare say there are degrees and levels of faith and devotion in Sikhism, as there are in Islam, Christianity etc., with many who claim those faiths being lapsed or non-practising.

IJ

Posted by Garden Hermit (# 109) on :

Religion is such a difficult subject to talk about. Its difficult enough in a Church - and most of the people there want to listen. As is Politics and Sex. No wonder it was banned in polite company many years ago.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Good Heavens, Sir - are you saying that you are not in Polite Company here?

Is Outrage!

IJ

Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on :

I think the use on this thread of the word 'preach' is prejudiced. No one is saying she 'preached' to the patients. In the course of a conversation about their religious affiliation it seems she offered to pray.
That's not preaching.

I find the idea that offering to pray will somehow offend or frighten a vulnerable patient is about as ridiculous as suggesting that the presence of a chapel in the main corridor to the wards is also a threatening reminder that we are all going to die!

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

I remembering reading once about some research that had been done into the efficacy of prayer for the sick.

The most memorable finding, as I recall, was that for strong Christians offers of prayer were joyfully accepted and the prayers seemed beneficial, but for those who were somewhat more agnostic or nominal in their faith, offers of prayer were unnerving, and these patients become more anxious than before, rather than feeling better.

It's easy to forget that not everyone has a deep faith in a God who loves and forgives them. Not everyone has positive experiences of prayer. Being consciously prayed for - or with - is surely a rare experience for the average secular British person; when it happens it may just confirm their fear of being at death's door. And if they're neither convinced of salvation nor committed atheists I can see why this would be unpleasant for them.

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

It's incredibly discouraging. Nobody better dare for me, as I'll pray right back.

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Anselmina, what did you make of my thought experiment regarding a Sikh nurse above? Did that make you equally angry?

I don't know how varied Sikhism is. So I don't know if there's a lot of variation in how it's practiced.

For example, the Christian nurse expresses a view of healing and prayer within Christianity that I feel is at best naive and at worst abusive. So if I were a Sikh, and a nurse expressing such a view of our shared Sikh faith spoke to me in that way, I would be appalled and angry. I would feel trapped and 'got at', moreso because I am confined to a bed and a captive audience.

I would understand - as I would as a Christian - that the nurse was responding to some conscience-led impulse to do the right thing. I wouldn't complain. But why should I, in my condition, have to take on the burden of her conscience-inspired promptings? In my opinion, the nurse would be behaving unwisely and insensitively.

Now it may be that in Sikhism there are permissions within that religion to override working agreements to not invade patient privacy or whatever. But to me one of the beauties of Christlikeness is that one can be Christlike, without having to use dogma or 'preaching', and be effective by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Could the nurse not have trusted God to have understood her prayers for the patient? Why did she feel the need to tell a vulnerable, fearful person that they had a better chance of recovery if they suddenly acquired a more prayerful faith? Is her idea of God so limited that only self-referencing prayers work?

I'm sorry that she's lost her job. And I can see that, to her, she was doing God's work. But her primary purpose was to nurse, which she was still able to do in the strength of the God she believed in; a God fully capable of grasping complex, sensitive situations. I think that if the patient had wanted what she was offering, on top of that, it would've been obvious. And I think this was one of those instances where we don't need to have a soap-box approach to faith to be effective.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

What Anselmina and SvitlanaV2 have said.

[Overused]

IJ

(And, whilst I don't for one nanosecond wish him to be in that situation, I'd just love to hear Martin 'pray right back' at 'em!)

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
Could the nurse not have trusted God to have understood her prayers for the patient? Why did she feel the need to tell a vulnerable, fearful person that they had a better chance of recovery if they suddenly acquired a more prayerful faith? Is her idea of God so limited that only self-referencing prayers work?

The cynical part of me thinks she was hoping to be able to give a Testimony to her church about how she'd prayed Words Of Power that Healed a patient, in order to show how strong a Prayer Warrior she is.

Or maybe even that she was hoping the Healing caused by her Prayer would cause the patient to Turn To Christ, so that the patient could come to her church and Testify about how she was Healed and Brought To The Light by the nurse's Powerful Faith.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
One thing that none of you seem to have picked up on is that this nurses' job was actually to help patients fill in a form, on which was the question that asked what their religion was.

As far as I can tell from watching an interview with the lady, the religious conversation stemmed from the filling in of the form and specifically that question. It's not that she asked the patients if she could pray with them out of the blue!

I've had those forms filled in for me. They're intended as a way for staff to gather information not a conversation starter.

You're forgetting that eight patients complained about her talking to them about religion. She was asked by management to stop and sacked when she didn't.

When you sack someone there are a ton of due processes you're meant to go through. It's difficult to believe that she didn't understand the potential consequences for her of ignoring that request.

Tubbs

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I venture to disagree. I find it both suspicious and disturbing that the people mangers seem to pick on in these sort of cases always seem to be ethnic, female, or in this case, both. Odd, or one could say, fishy.

All people are ethnic, or none. To divide humanity into "non-ethnic" (the "default" which of course happens to be white) and "ethnic" (different from default/normal) is grossly offensive.

quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
I remember being told by a former nurse, who was looking after a young mother on her ward that she was so upset by her plight - she looked to be dying - that when she was on the night shift she took the opportunity afforded by solitude in the midst of sleep to anoint the woman with the oil consecrated for the purpose. The young woman subsequently recovered - make of that what you will.

I make of it confirmation bias.

quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
As far as I can tell from watching an interview with the lady, the religious conversation stemmed from the filling in of the form and specifically that question. It's not that she asked the patients if she could pray with them out of the blue!

Having a real hard time here believing that she was fired after being reprimanded multiple times for ... doing her job. Not buying it.

quote:
Originally posted by Garden Hermit:
Another 'difficult situation' is when someone tells you they have been bereaved. No-one knows what to say these days, and says nothing, and when they see the other person again deliberately cross the road to avoid another difficult conversation.

Bull. One says, "I'm so very sorry." If one is a close friend or relative, one offers to do something to help such as bring food. One such might inquire if there is going to be any service, and express the desire to be informed of the time and location, and the intention to be there. If someone doesn't know what to say, they're an idiot.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I think the use on this thread of the word 'preach' is prejudiced. No one is saying she 'preached' to the patients. In the course of a conversation about their religious affiliation it seems she offered to pray.
That's not preaching.

I find the idea that offering to pray will somehow offend or frighten a vulnerable patient is about as ridiculous as suggesting that the presence of a chapel in the main corridor to the wards is also a threatening reminder that we are all going to die!

Then why did eight patients complain?

I can't believe that they were orchestrated in some way or that they had a confab and clubbed together in order to get the nurse sacked.

I'm about as cynical of management as it is possible to be but even I find that hard to swallow.

Of course, I don't know all the details of the case but if 8 people complained then it all likelihood there could have been far more who weren't happy about it but who let it slide.

Yes, there are perennial complainers and people who like to make a fuss about each and every issue - I'm on the town council so I know all about that ...

But for there to be persistent complaints and a persistent refusal to obey instructions to desist then it rather suggests that things had got to a pretty pass.

It's not easy to sack people in highly regulated organisations so there must have been a case to answer.

Ok, it is possible for managers to manipulate people out of jobs but from what I've read here it doesn't strike me as anything intrinsically 'anti-Christian' or anti-faith.

I don't doubt the sincerity of the nurse's faith nor her integrity - but you can't repeatedly ignore instructions/orders and hope that by appealing to a Higher Power you can escape the consequences.

Sure, there are times when it might be appropriate to offer prayer or counsel but from the info we've been given here it rather looks as if the nurse was over-stepping the mark ... and yes, I fully accept that the mark isn't set very highly here in the UK where the merest hint of religion is likely to scare the horses ...

But that's the way it is.

Heck, my wife has incurable cancer but if someone were to approach/accost her to offer prayer in a way we considered invasive or inappropriate we'd be rather annoyed. In fact, when she had the first bout a few years ago, the primary cancer, I sent a polite but rather stiff email to the vicar after his wife bounced up to wife after a morning service and tried to pray for her in a way we weren't comfortable with.

We have to be careful how we go about these things - and if that applies outside of the hospital context, how much more should it apply inside one.

Posted by Ethne Alba (# 5804) on :

Mudfrog....(and apologies for the totally wrong name attributed to you upthread...my bad)

The "preach" bit was i guess thrown into the mix because that is what sometimes some people call it when Christians go on about our faith...when no one has asked us to.

And leading on from the questions on that form to a whole other conversation about the effectiveness or otherwise of prayer, could i suggest be termed preaching?

And it's not a compliment to be spoken of in that way either.
.
.
.

Up until now i have responded in theory only.
But recently i was in hospital and potentially very serious it was too. Had any member of the nursing team said anything like that to me, it would have reduced me to a quivering wreck. It's quite bad enough being ill, not really knowing what is going to happen next and in hospital anyway, without the indignity of being held captive in a conversation with someone that i don't know.

Would i have complained?
I hope not. I hope that i would have merely had a stern word with the nurse face to face.
But in reality, when one member of the conversation is fully dressed and in a uniform at that. While the other is undressed and potentially in bed. I suggest that the power scenario has not been properly thought through by the nurse.
.
.
.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I find it both suspicious and disturbing that the people mangers seem to pick on in these sort of cases always seem to be ethnic, female, or in this case, both.

This surely reflects the relatively high number of such people in nursing and related professions in the UK.

Unlike others here I think this reality could create an ongoing cultural issue in the UK. As the indigenous population ages and has fewer children in each generation to step into these jobs the number of workers from abroad is likely to increase.

This is fine, but newcomers' religious attitudes won't align themselves with those of the wider culture automatically. Indeed, there's a chance that cultural and religious understanding will decline rather than increase, as the newcomers begin to share less and less religious ground with the indigenous population. (Fewer than half of the latter now identify as Christian).

Special classes in cultural awareness for all nurses, whether trained in the UK or abroad, might need to be introduced.

Posted by Huia (# 3473) on :

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[QUOTE]Special classes in cultural awareness for all nurses, whether trained in the UK or abroad, might need to be introduced.

I would be surprised if such classes don't exist already. I know that the nursing degree at the local Polytech has a cultural awareness component.

Huia

Posted by The Phantom Flan Flinger (# 8891) on :

Could the nurse not have prayed quietly on her own for these patients without having to make a production about it?

Didn't somebody once say something about not praying to be seen by men (or women)?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Oh yes, the same chap I usually quote when peeps boast about what they're giving up for Lent......

IJ

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Huia:

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[QUOTE]Special classes in cultural awareness for all nurses, whether trained in the UK or abroad, might need to be introduced.
I would be surprised if such classes don't exist already. I know that the nursing degree at the local Polytech has a cultural awareness component.

Huia

They are part of every Nurse's training in the UK. The major world faiths are explained although on reading the first edition (it may now be changed), it's hard not to come away with the impression that all faiths aren't created equal.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
They are part of every Nurse's training in the UK. The major world faiths are explained although on reading the first edition (it may now be changed), it's hard not to come away with the impression that all faiths aren't created equal.

I'm confused by the double-negative in the above. Are you suggesting that the curriculum should be teaching nurses that some faiths are better than others?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Hmm. I read it as saying that EM thinks that all faiths should be treated equally under these circumstances.

Which I reckon is about right.

IJ

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by Huia:

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

Special classes in cultural awareness for all nurses, whether trained in the UK or abroad, might need to be introduced.
I would be surprised if such classes don't exist already. I know that the nursing degree at the local Polytech has a cultural awareness component.

Huia
They are part of every Nurse's training in the UK. The major world faiths are explained although on reading the first edition (it may now be changed), it's hard not to come away with the impression that all faiths aren't created equal.

It's not so much a question of having faiths 'explained' but of understanding the purposes that religion generally serves in a culture like ours.

Most British people who call themselves Christians/CofE/'I believe in something' will have a tangential, personalised, variously influenced and probably deeply uninformed relationship with whatever doctrines any particular denomination 'teaches'. This awareness is what's relevant to nurses working in Britain, I would have thought.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

I'm not so sure that the doctrinal issues you mention here are the real nub of this one, SvitlanaV2.

Even the haziest and most nominal Anglican or RC would be aware that religion involves prayer.

It's not as if the nurse has been dismissed for testing someone on the 39 Articles or the RC Catechism, the Westminster Confession or the finer points of the Nicean-Chalcedonian formularies ...

No, she has been dismissed for apparently offering to pray for patients in a way that those patients found inappropriate.

That's got very little to do with whether they understand a particular set of doctrines and more to do with issues of personal privacy or feelings of being taken advantage of or invasiveness.

If you're filling in a form where one of the questions is about your religious affiliation you don't expect a Spanish Inquisition about it nor do you expect the person dealing with the form to suddenly offer prayer for your healing or well-being.

That's not what the form is for.

I can see how it would be appropriate for the nurse to have prayed if someone requested it. 'Would you pray for me, sister?'

But to offer it without any kind of permission or 'lead-in' strikes me as presumptious.

Ok, I get that the nurse may have assumed that because someone entered 'Christian' on the form that this gave her permission to engage them in prayer - but this can't have been her impression for very long as it appears that the management had asked her to desist because of complaints. Not once but several times. Yet she persisted.

I'm sure she acted with integrity according to her lights, as it were, but one would have assumed that having been warned several times and told that people were complaining she might have had sufficient indication that this wasn't the 'done thing'.

I'm not trying to minimise any cultural differences there might have been, but I find it hard to believe that the nurse would have remained unfamiliar with UK cultural practices in this regard after 8 complaints and numerous warnings.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by Huia:

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[QUOTE]Special classes in cultural awareness for all nurses, whether trained in the UK or abroad, might need to be introduced.
I would be surprised if such classes don't exist already. I know that the nursing degree at the local Polytech has a cultural awareness component.

Huia
They are part of every Nurse's training in the UK. The major world faiths are explained although on reading the first edition (it may now be changed), it's hard not to come away with the impression that all faiths aren't created equal.

This wasn't believed to be adequate 11 years ago when I was asked by a hospital chaplain to 'top it up' with some extra training sessions.

[ 07. April 2017, 17:29: Message edited by: leo ]

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'm not so sure that the doctrinal issues you mention here are the real nub of this one, SvitlanaV2.

Even the haziest and most nominal Anglican or RC would be aware that religion involves prayer.

It's not as if the nurse has been dismissed for testing someone on the 39 Articles or the RC Catechism, the Westminster Confession or the finer points of the Nicean-Chalcedonian formularies ...

No, she has been dismissed for apparently offering to pray for patients in a way that those patients found inappropriate.

[...]

I'm not trying to minimise any cultural differences there might have been, but I find it hard to believe that the nurse would have remained unfamiliar with UK cultural practices in this regard after 8 complaints and numerous warnings.

My point is that those patients found those offers of prayer unpleasant for primarily cultural reasons.

I'd say that British people don't, on the whole, want strangers to pray with them. This will be true regardless of whatever their ancestral faith tradition (which they may cleave to in name only) may teach about the fellowship of all believers, brotherhood in Christ, or the power of prayer, etc. Privacy is a more powerful religion. And fair enough.

The fact that this lady was unable to respond 'appropriately' after all these warnings suggests that she's either lacking in basic comprehension skills, has an inflated view of her own persuasiveness and/or religious calling, or is indeed is still very culturally confused. Probably a mixture. We don't know what her superiors told her other than 'Stop doing it', so she could still be culturally fazed.

Living where she does, it's possible that she doesn't meet enough of the indigenous population on a friendship basis to enable her to get a serious grip on the cultural differences about religion. That's what I think, anyway.

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by Huia:

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[QUOTE]Special classes in cultural awareness for all nurses, whether trained in the UK or abroad, might need to be introduced.
I would be surprised if such classes don't exist already. I know that the nursing degree at the local Polytech has a cultural awareness component.

Huia
They are part of every Nurse's training in the UK. The major world faiths are explained although on reading the first edition (it may now be changed), it's hard not to come away with the impression that all faiths aren't created equal.
This wasn't believed to be adequate 11 years ago when I was asked by a hospital chaplain to 'top it up' with some extra training sessions.

Well, both you and the Chaplain acted illegally.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by Huia:

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[QUOTE]Special classes in cultural awareness for all nurses, whether trained in the UK or abroad, might need to be introduced.
I would be surprised if such classes don't exist already. I know that the nursing degree at the local Polytech has a cultural awareness component.

Huia
They are part of every Nurse's training in the UK. The major world faiths are explained although on reading the first edition (it may now be changed), it's hard not to come away with the impression that all faiths aren't created equal.

Yes, but no. Undergraduate nurse training in spiritual care is patchy at best, and unless something had changed radically since I left the business two years ago, has actually declined, not improved in the past 10 years or so.

While I was in my last post, I was lucky to be supported in developing a series of training sessions: undergraduate, post-qualified, training for spiritual care "link" nurses (who liaised with spiritual care professionals), and specialised training for palliative and end of life care nurses. Even so, these were picked up or dropped from time to time by the people in charge of nurse education. I don't know if there's any real coordination of spiritual care training in nurse education nationally, but the fact that I don't know suggests there probably isn't.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Well, both you and the Chaplain acted illegally.

Eh?

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :

I discovered yesterday that this case hasn't actually been decided yet. The hearing has taken place, but the tribunal hasn't issued its decision. So
a. We don't actually know the result. And
b. We need to be a bit cautious about how freely we express opinions on what is not 'what we think the decision was' but 'what we'd like/not like it to be'. Otherwise some or all of us could be in contempt.

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :

Well, you might be right there, SvitlanaV2 but I'm going to hang-fire now I've read Enoch's warning.

One assumes that cultural differences and expectations would be taken into account in a case like this, although whether that would mitigate things remains to be seen.

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I discovered yesterday that this case hasn't actually been decided yet. The hearing has taken place, but the tribunal hasn't issued its decision. So
a. We don't actually know the result. And
b. We need to be a bit cautious about how freely we express opinions on what is not 'what we think the decision was' but 'what we'd like/not like it to be'. Otherwise some or all of us could be in contempt.

How does that work?

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by Huia:

quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[QUOTE]Special classes in cultural awareness for all nurses, whether trained in the UK or abroad, might need to be introduced.
I would be surprised if such classes don't exist already. I know that the nursing degree at the local Polytech has a cultural awareness component.

Huia
They are part of every Nurse's training in the UK. The major world faiths are explained although on reading the first edition (it may now be changed), it's hard not to come away with the impression that all faiths aren't created equal.
This wasn't believed to be adequate 11 years ago when I was asked by a hospital chaplain to 'top it up' with some extra training sessions.
Well, both you and the Chaplain acted illegally.

How so?

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
How so?

The NHS training was and is, assumed to be sufficient. Anything else would have gone beyond guidelines, technically rendering the chaplain to disciplinary proceedings. Of course if you do it outside the system, that's up to you.

NHS training - given to all - should in theory at least, mean that everyone starts at the same page.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
How so?
The NHS training was and is, assumed to be sufficient. Anything else would have gone beyond guidelines, technically rendering the chaplain to disciplinary proceedings. Of course if you do it outside the system, that's up to you.

NHS training - given to all - should in theory at least, mean that everyone starts at the same page.

Sorry, but this is rubbish. Even basic medical and nursing education varies a bit between universities, beyond a core syllabus - hence, for example, some nurses getting training on spiritual care in their undergraduate course, and some not.

Even so, NHS Trusts have enormous choice in what they provide as post-qualification training. The main requirement for staff is that attendance at any training has to be justified in each staff member's training plan as identified at their annual review. If a chaplain can convince nurse managers that training in spiritual care is needed, it'll go on the Trust's syllabus.

Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :

I know nothing, of course, but I suspect if the chaplain unilaterally declared that all nursing staff had to take compulsory spiritual seminars without discussion with whoever-it-is, this might well be acting outwith of his authority and role.

But I find it hard to believe that a chaplain acting to provide training mandated by the Trust (if a nurse was found to be weak and require retraining) or following proper processes to put the training within the ongoing nurse training is acting "illegally".

I think even a chaplain mentioning to a nurse that he/she might benefit from some additional voluntary training (providing this was in full knowledge of the trust) is acting legally.

One would have thought the only possible illegality would be if the chaplain was doing something underhand or somehow blackmailing the nurse - by having some kind of power over them to insist on non-mandatory training which if refused would cost their job.

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I know nothing, of course, but I suspect if the chaplain unilaterally declared that all nursing staff had to take compulsory spiritual seminars without discussion with whoever-it-is, this might well be acting outwith of his authority and role.

But I find it hard to believe that a chaplain acting to provide training mandated by the Trust (if a nurse was found to be weak and require retraining) or following proper processes to put the training within the ongoing nurse training is acting "illegally".

I think even a chaplain mentioning to a nurse that he/she might benefit from some additional voluntary training (providing this was in full knowledge of the trust) is acting legally.

One would have thought the only possible illegality would be if the chaplain was doing something underhand or somehow blackmailing the nurse - by having some kind of power over them to insist on non-mandatory training which if refused would cost their job.

You're right. In-house training programmes are always overcrowded, with every department clamouring "but nurses need training in [insert my subject here]!" In order to get something on the programme, you need to show that a measureable benefit will be achieved which is in line with national and Trust-level objectives. (You will also have to have it ok'ed by your own manager that you can spend time developing and delivering the training - after all, you have other work to do that may take priority.) But if you can do that, and can get a foot in the door with your education department, all you have to do then is be fabulous when you're delivering the training.

It sounds a terrible faff, but the bottom line is that every discipline within the NHS should be able to deminstrate that it's spending public money (and time, which is money) responsibly and for the best achievable results.

Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :

The article says the nurse's praying often meant she failed to complete the pre-op form! I always speak with my pre-op nurse at great length about what I want her to tell my anesthesiologist. ( I tend to go deep and not want to come back, with my blood oxygen dropping very low.)It's important stuff! Apart from all else she's not doing a good job.

My dentist always asks if we can pray together first. I don't mind his prayers as much as all the right wing politics I have to listen to while my mouth is full and I can't argue back. He's the most unskilled dentist I've ever had, actually a bit dangerous, so while he's praying for me I'm usually praying that he have a steady hand and not be as stupid as usual.

For years I've noticed that the people who advertise their Christianity the loudest, are so often the ones who are doing the very worst job of witnessing. The terrible driver with the Jesus stickers on the bumper, the Christian Carpet Cleaners, who don't show up on their appointed day, the big after church group in the restaurant that doesn't tip. I try to never let anyone know I'm a Christian unless I'm determined to be perfect that day, so like never.

Posted by Helen-Eva (# 15025) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I try to never let anyone know I'm a Christian unless I'm determined to be perfect that day, so like never.

TANGENT ALERT

There's definitely a teaching somewhere (Matthew 5:48 according to the good people at Google) that says "you must be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect". Seems totally unreasonable to me. How the **** am I supposed to be perfect?? Not gonna happen. Maybe I need to take this to Kergymania for assistance and explication.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Twilight - go to another dentist. Now. Seriously.

IJ

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:

For years I've noticed that the people who advertise their Christianity the loudest, are so often the ones who are doing the very worst job of witnessing.

The only duff car I've ever bought was off a guy who couldn't shut up about the very well known Pentecostal Church he went to; and how great it was we were 'brother and sister' in Christ, and how his good, godly conscience wouldn't let him sell an unfit car, especially to a fellow Christian, praise the Lord, etc etc. It lasted about six months after giving me no end of trouble, and I ended up having to sell it for scrap.

When it comes to paying hard earned cash for goods and services, give me a competent, honest agnostic/atheist over a full-of-crap corner-cutting Christian any day.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Latest news on this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-39443613

IJ

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0