U of L dismisses nursing student over blog posts

[LiberalNation]

Hope she wins, what bs. Her blog was creative and the admin are all assholes.

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20090314/NEWS01/903140393/1008/rss01

A student dismissed from the University of Louisville's nursing school because of her Internet postings has sued the university, alleging that it violated her First Amendment rights.


Nina Yoder, who served in the U.S. Army as a medic before she enrolled at U of L in 2007, yesterday asked a federal court judge to reinstate her. No hearing has been set on her motion.

The nursing school expelled her March 2, saying her MySpace postings "regarding patient activities and identification as a University of Louisville School of Nursing student violates the nursing honor code which you pledged to uphold," according to a copy of her dismissal letter, which was attached to the suit.

In her lawsuit, however, Yoder says no patients were identified on her MySpace page and that school officials dismissed her because of false concerns by other students that she might have had a gun.

The suit says that when she was called in for a meeting on Feb. 27, she was patted down by two campus police officers who found no weapon. And she said she's never brought one on campus.

In her blog postings, copies of which are attached to the suit, Yoder defends the right to bear arms and makes often caustic and profane observations on race, sex and religion, including diatribes against Christians and blacks.

[glockmail]

She violated the pledge, so gets canned; end of story. *shrug*

[sgtdmski]

I am not sure what to think of this incident. I have not checked out her myspace page, but this does raise some issues of concern.

Working in the medical field, especially the night shift, I know the frustration one can get from dealing with patients. One would usually expect the night shift to be filled with the more difficult and exciting cases, the sudden illnesses that are life threatening, automobile accidents, etc. Unfortunately that is not the case, routinely it is filled with the colds, sore throats, upset stomachs, etc, that would be better suited for a routine doctor's office visit.

Venting ones frustration is the only way some of us can make it through are days. I work 7 days on then 7 days off. You better believe that those seven days off, I don't even think about the job. Venting with others, or in our blogs is the way we relieve our built up frustrations and that allows us to do our jobs. So too do the sick jokes we sometimes make about diseases, patients, and all sort of things. If we took everything seriously, we would burn out and not be able to do our jobs.

For every 100 patients we see that have bullshit complaints, there will always be that 1, that if not for the jokes and venting, we would never be able to get over. Whether it be the newborn who stopped breathing, the teenage who got drunk and crushed his chest in an ATV accident, or the mother of four who was hit head on by a drunk driver that didn't even get a scratch, who died in the ER.

We live through all these things, and have to deal with them. Some might say we have sick methods of doing so, but we do what we have to so that the next time it happens we are here at work and willing to go full out one more time.

Many in nursing school don' know this, having been a medic in the military, it seems that Ms Yoder is well aware of what she must to do make it through. She we really hold that against her?

dmk

[LiberalNation]

No but the school is all about control even outside the school enviroment. Thought control at it's worst.

[glockmail]

No but the school is all about control even outside the school enviroment. Thought control at it's worst.
So go to a different school. *shrug*

[actsnoblemartin]

So go to a different school. *shrug*

the school is over steppng its authority, and engaging in an illegal and abusive action

[DannyR]

No but the school is all about control even outside the school enviroment. Thought control at it's worst.Not thought control. Reputation control. This isn't much different than many other institutions that have a stake in what members do away from work. Forget for a moment that she's a student. What if she were a newcaster, or professional athlete, or contestant on a show like American Idol? We've all seen similar stories of people being tossed because of behavior done elsewhere.

If her school can look at her page and find out what she has said about people, what's to stop patients from doing the same? It potentially reflects back upon the school, and thus damages their reputation.

Fact is she signed a statement agreeing to hold a high standard of behavior even away from school. She broke that pledge. Bye bye. She can enroll elsewhere.

[actsnoblemartin]

how ?

by saying im a nurse?


Not thought control. Reputation control. This isn't much different than many other institutions that have a stake in what members do away from work. Forget for a moment that she's a student. What if she were a newcaster, or professional athlete, or contestant on a show like American Idol? We've all seen similar stories of people being tossed because of behavior done elsewhere.

If her school can look at her page and find out what she has said about people, what's to stop patients from doing the same? It potentially reflects back upon the school, and thus damages their reputation.

Fact is she signed a statement agreeing to hold a high standard of behavior even away from school. She broke that pledge. Bye bye. She can enroll elsewhere.

[actsnoblemartin]

schools should not have a right to regulate in any way the free speech of their students on or off campus and any attempt to do so is a blantant violation of the first amendment.

We need more liberty, not less

[DannyR]

how ?

by saying im a nurse?Nurse's wear name tags. If her myspace page was so easily found that her school looked her up, then nothing would stop one of her patients from doing the same.

She badmouthed the people who lived nearby the hospital. I'm guessing those very same people are patients and interact with her on a daily basis.


schools should not have a right to regulate in any way the free speech of their students on or off campus and any attempt to do so is a blantant violation of the first amendment.1st amendment regulates government control, not private institutions.

If you are a salesman, and you badmouth the people you do business with in a public place where it might get back to both them and your employer, you can bet you'll be fired. ESPECIALLY when you have a signed contract saying you'll not do such a thing! This is no different.

[sgtdmski]

Nurse's wear name tags. If her myspace page was so easily found that her school looked her up, then nothing would stop one of her patients from doing the same.

She badmouthed the people who lived nearby the hospital. I'm guessing those very same people are patients and interact with her on a daily basis.

1st amendment regulates government control, not private institutions.

If you are a salesman, and you badmouth the people you do business with in a public place where it might get back to both them and your employer, you can bet you'll be fired. ESPECIALLY when you have a signed contract saying you'll not do such a thing! This is no different.

The school has access to the person's full name. I work in a hospital, I introduce myself to patients by my first name only. So, unless a patient browsed every myspace page by a person that had the same first name as mine they would probably not find my page.

The real issue is the confidentiality. As a medical employee I cannot discuss a patient by name, or for that matter room number. However, we all talk about the patients and the ailments that present with, sometimes we badmouth them, but when you have seen the same patient every other day for the same complaint, seeking the same drug, sometimes they get badmouthed. So to, do the one we know are breaching the system, the medicaid patients who do not pay anything for their treatment that show up to the ER, causing a waste in money and resources, you damn well better believe the we bad mouth them especially with all the talk about a nationalized health system.

Sorry, but as I said, sometimes we need to vent.

Since I am at work I cannot access the myspace page, during days off I will look and see what exactly was written, however, until that time, one must really ask, is the punishment warranted the crime. From what has been reported it does not seem so to me.

dmk

[sgtdmski]

1st amendment regulates government control, not private institutions.

If you are a salesman, and you badmouth the people you do business with in a public place where it might get back to both them and your employer, you can bet you'll be fired. ESPECIALLY when you have a signed contract saying you'll not do such a thing! This is no different.

Sorry but this is a government institution. The university of Louisville is a state-funded institution. Just as a public school cannot allow prayer in school. A state-funded institution is considered government and therefore cannot violate anyone's rights.

dmk

[glockmail]

the school is over steppng its authority, and engaging in an illegal and abusive action Not at all. She signed a pledge, and then violated it. Constitutional rights don't carry over to private contracts.

[bullypulpit]

She violated the pledge, so gets canned; end of story. *shrug*

Didn't see anything which violated the pledge. The school has no business monitoring student activities off campus and on their own time. Talk about big brotherism...

[glockmail]

Didn't see anything which violated the pledge. The school has no business monitoring student activities off campus and on their own time. Talk about big brotherism... From the OP link:
Drees also provided a copy of the nursing school's two-page honor code, which all students are required to sign. One portion of it says: "As a representative of the School of Nursing, I pledge to adhere to the highest standards of honesty, integrity, accountability, confidentiality, and professionalism, in all my written work, spoken words, actions and interactions with patients, families, peers and faculty."


In her blog postings, copies of which are attached to the suit, Yoder defends the right to bear arms and makes often caustic and profane observations on race, sex and religion, including diatribes against Christians and blacks.

Perhaps you can explain how "diatribes against Christians and blacks" meets the "highest standard of integrity and professionalism".

[Nukeman]

Thus the reason I don't have a myspace account.... If it isn't written down, it didn't happen.....:cheers2:

[actsnoblemartin]

does the code of conduct state we have the right to fire you for what we deem as unprofessional behavior off the clock?

and in essence by firing her, for her beliefs, arent they violating her political rights?


From the OP link:



Perhaps you can explain how "diatribes against Christians and blacks" meets the "highest standard of integrity and professionalism".

[Nukeman]

does the code of conduct state we have the right to fire you for what we deem as unprofessional behavior off the clock?

and in essence by firing her, for her beliefs, arent they violating her political rights?
unfortunately it does. example... If you smoke pot "off the clock" and they find out about it you are pretty darn sure to be shown the door after a drug test confirms you smoked in the last 30 days.....

[Kathianne]

unfortunately it does. example... If you smoke pot "off the clock" and they find out about it you are pretty darn sure to be shown the door after a drug test confirms you smoked in the last 30 days.....

Which is made very clear in undergrad classes. Same with teaching, in a 'good district' if convicted of DUI or other, even with tenure they can get you out. 'Higher standard' and such.

[Mr. P]

Follow the rules or deal with the consequences. Simple...it's part of life.

[Kathianne]

Follow the rules or deal with the consequences. Simple...it's part of life.

Yep, at least not blog under your 'real' identity, dealing with real patients.

[Nukeman]

Yep, at least not blog under your 'real' identity, dealing with real patients.

True how very true. I have tried to tell my kids make "good" decisions and THINK through what your about to do, it could come back to bite you in the butt later. :coffee:

Do I agree that this girl should have been removed????? I don't think so, but I am not her instructor or mentor in the program, not my call, I would have FIRST informed her that what she was doing is potentialy harmful to HER career and told her to either stop or find another. that way it was her choice what she was going to do....

[bullypulpit]

From the OP link:



Perhaps you can explain how "diatribes against Christians and blacks" meets the "highest standard of integrity and professionalism".

The university has no business monitoring interactions between "families and peers". It's unwarranted intrusion into private lives that you conservatives claim to be against. As long as it doesn't involve standing up in a crowded theater and yelling "FIRE!", or clear violations of HIPPA, it's none of their business

[Monkeybone]

The university has no business monitoring interactions between "families and peers". It's unwarranted intrusion into private lives that you conservatives claim to be against. As long as it doesn't involve standing up in a crowded theater and yelling "FIRE!", or clear violations of HIPPA, it's none of their business

i agree with the last half of your post Bully, if she didn't give out info that could identify someone then she is ok. but the first part has the thought "if you put it on myspace, it is no longer private".

[sgtdmski]

Not at all. She signed a pledge, and then violated it. Constitutional rights don't carry over to private contracts.

By whose definition?

She had diatribe against Christians and Blacks, what exactly did she say?

Hell, the current President expressed a diatribe against religious people, you remember that statement, about clinging to their religion and guns. Hmmm let's see by your standard he violated my consitutional rights, my right of free exercise, so I guess that means the President is a civil rights violator, and as such needs to be removed from office right.

That's what I thought.

She expressed her opinion on her own time, on her own web page. She has the right to free speech, no contract can take that away.

dmk

[sgtdmski]

From the OP link:



Perhaps you can explain how "diatribes against Christians and blacks" meets the "highest standard of integrity and professionalism".

And how was her myspace page dealing with patients, families, peers and faculty? Was the myspace page a required portion of the class? If not then it has nothing to do with her interaction, or her written words in relationship to the pledge.

Now if the U of L could prove that she did this during class time, or on university equipment, or in a hospital during a work rotation they may have a claim. However, if it was done on her own equipment using her own free time, then the U of L has no business in disciplining her for her use of her First Amendment Rights.

dmk

[glockmail]

And how was her myspace page dealing with patients, families, peers and faculty? Was the myspace page a required portion of the class? If not then it has nothing to do with her interaction, or her written words in relationship to the pledge.

Now if the U of L could prove that she did this during class time, or on university equipment, or in a hospital during a work rotation they may have a claim. However, if it was done on her own equipment using her own free time, then the U of L has no business in disciplining her for her use of her First Amendment Rights.

dmk Where does the Pledge limit itself to patients, families, peers and faculty?

[glockmail]

By whose definition?

She had diatribe against Christians and Blacks, what exactly did she say?

Hell, the current President expressed a diatribe against religious people, you remember that statement, about clinging to their religion and guns. Hmmm let's see by your standard he violated my consitutional rights, my right of free exercise, so I guess that means the President is a civil rights violator, and as such needs to be removed from office right.

That's what I thought.

She expressed her opinion on her own time, on her own web page. She has the right to free speech, no contract can take that away.

dmkI have no idea what she said. If I had the authority I would have dismissed the current President because of that statement along with a pattern of deceit.

[glockmail]

The university has no business monitoring interactions between "families and peers". It's unwarranted intrusion into private lives that you conservatives claim to be against. As long as it doesn't involve standing up in a crowded theater and yelling "FIRE!", or clear violations of HIPPA, it's none of their business I doubt the university was "monitoring". The matter was likely brought to their attention, and as such, were forced to enforce their policy. *shrug*

[glockmail]

does the code of conduct state we have the right to fire you for what we deem as unprofessional behavior off the clock?

and in essence by firing her, for her beliefs, arent they violating her political rights?If that's what the stated Code says, then yes. My professional Code of Ethics lets the State take away my damn license to practice if I screw up, and I pay them, not the other way around. That's much worse than simply losing a job- its my career.

[DannyR]

If that's what the stated Code says, then yes. The honor code: http://louisville.edu/nursing/current-students/honor-code.html

It specifically mentions ALL written works, not just school related ones.

The honor code is apparently a big deal at the Univ. of Louisville. They have a special ceremony commemorating the signing of it. Its not just a contract the student might sign with an admissions document that they would be unaware of what is there.

http://louisville.edu/nursing/articles/transition-ceremony.html/

[sgtdmski]

Where does the Pledge limit itself to patients, families, peers and faculty?

The third sentence ends with the following:


with patients, families, peers and faculty.

This is a prepositional phrase (you remember English Grammar right). Which means it is acting as a adjective or adverb in this sentence answer the question with who.

I would expect that the University was able to apply the idea of Basic Grammar to a sentence that was written by the University itself.

The entire sentence reads:


Therefore, as a representative of the School of Nursing, I pledge to adhere to the highest standards of honesty, integrity, accountability, confidentiality, and professionalism, in all my written work, spoken words, actions and interactions

With who?

With patients, families, peers and faculty.


Damn, all that from Basic Grammar in the English language. Hmmm perhaps if the University spent more time on teaching the Basics instead of patrolling their students myspace pages, they would have not made this mistake.

Oh well, so much for higher education.

dmk

[sgtdmski]

I doubt the university was "monitoring". The matter was likely brought to their attention, and as such, were forced to enforce their policy. *shrug*

I agree with totally. I believe that this was the case, it was brought to their attention. However, they have set a standard based upoin their Code of Conduct, and if this proceeds to trial, they will lose. For their Code also mentions the following:


I recognize that these responsibilities do not end with graduation, but are a lifelong endeavor.

So they must now show that they have monitored every student who has ever signed this pledge from the time they have been in school until now. They must have documentation. If they don't then they have proved that their Code has no true meaning. That is quite an uphill struggle if you ask me, and furthermore, I would want to see said documentation.

dmk

[DannyR]

they would have not made this mistake.Definition of the word "peer" is tricky though. It could easily mean anyone you associate with. Webster for instance uses the following "one belonging to the same societal group especially based on age, grade, or status"

Myspace can be seen as a societal group, and one's friends one's peers.

[sgtdmski]

Definition of the word "peer" is tricky though. It could easily mean anyone you associate with. Webster for instance uses the following "one belonging to the same societal group especially based on age, grade, or status"

Myspace can be seen as a societal group, and one's friends one's peers.

Yes, but in this Code peer would be viewed as to mean fellow students in the Nursing School.

Still, this is while in class or on rotation. It does not cover what one does in their time away from class or rotation.

dmk

[glockmail]

The third sentence ends with the following:



This is a prepositional phrase (you remember English Grammar right). Which means it is acting as a adjective or adverb in this sentence answer the question with who.

I would expect that the University was able to apply the idea of Basic Grammar to a sentence that was written by the University itself.

The entire sentence reads:



With who?

With patients, families, peers and faculty.


Damn, all that from Basic Grammar in the English language. Hmmm perhaps if the University spent more time on teaching the Basics instead of patrolling their students myspace pages, they would have not made this mistake.

Oh well, so much for higher education.

dmk
Yeah so much for higher education, apparently. The word "peers" has a broad interpretation, and obviously includes folks who read her blog. *shrug*

[glockmail]

I agree with totally. I believe that this was the case, it was brought to their attention. However, they have set a standard based upoin their Code of Conduct, and if this proceeds to trial, they will lose. For their Code also mentions the following:



So they must now show that they have monitored every student who has ever signed this pledge from the time they have been in school until now. They must have documentation. If they don't then they have proved that their Code has no true meaning. That is quite an uphill struggle if you ask me, and furthermore, I would want to see said documentation.

dmkNot really. They don't have to show that they haven't monitored anyone else because they haven't monitored her. Also, if someone brings to their attention some crap done by a student who has since left the school, the administration no longer has the option to expel them. *shrug*

[glockmail]

Yes, but in this Code peer would be viewed as to mean fellow students in the Nursing School.... Viewed by you perhaps, but certainty not by "a jury of your peers". *shrug*

[sgtdmski]

Yeah so much for higher education, apparently. The word "peers" has a broad interpretation, and obviously includes folks who read her blog. *shrug*

In legal cases words will have a narrow definition. Peers will be looked at in context with the statement. Peer is coupled with faculty, therefore peer will be defined as fellow students and classmembers.

Once again the University is calling in to question whether or not the people who are running the show are actually qualified to be doing so, thus far, they have not shown me a lot.

dmk

[sgtdmski]

Viewed by you perhaps, but certainty not by "a jury of your peers". *shrug*

How do you figure? The word peer is coupled with the word faculty. Any judge worth having that title will instruct a jury that in deciding the case they must use a narrow interpretation of the words used in the code.

Furthermore, as I said the school also included in the Code that it is to last throughout their lifetime, I sure hope that they can provide proof that they are monitoring every student who has ever signed that code, if not, they are in quite a bind with any jury.

dmk

[glockmail]

How do you figure? The word peer is coupled with the word faculty. Any judge worth having that title will instruct a jury that in deciding the case they must use a narrow interpretation of the words used in the code.

Furthermore, as I said the school also included in the Code that it is to last throughout their lifetime, I sure hope that they can provide proof that they are monitoring every student who has ever signed that code, if not, they are in quite a bind with any jury.

dmk

You're providing your own definition of a word simply to bolster your own argument. The word "peer" by any a reasonable interpretation would include folks that she blogs with, just as on this board, you and I are peers.

Again, if someone brings to their attention some crap done by a student who has since left the school, the administration no longer has the option to expel them.

[DannyR]

Any judge worth having that title will instruct a jury that in deciding the case they must use a narrow interpretation of the words used in the code.

I don't believe there is a standard on if definitions should be interpreted broadly or narrowly, so I doubt the judge would rule as you said. In fact, the primary argument of the case would likely be on this very factor. For the judge to preemptively make a judgment would toss the case before hearing any arguments either way.

the following is geared toward patent cases, but obviously the debate on how words should be interpreted in courts is still a factor in most law cases:

http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/files/dennis_crouch_paper_on_phillips_v.%20AWH

[sgtdmski]

You're providing your own definition of a word simply to bolster your own argument. The word "peer" by any a reasonable interpretation would include folks that she blogs with, just as on this board, you and I are peers.

Again, if someone brings to their attention some crap done by a student who has since left the school, the administration no longer has the option to expel them.

Yes, on this board you and I are peers. However, we are talking about the a Code of Conduct established by the University of Louisville Nursing School. In a legal case, the word of peer would be defined in a narrow way. The word would be taken in context with its sentence, in this sentence the word would is used coupled to the word faculty, therefore legally in a court of law, the word peer would be interpreted to mean fellow students and class members or in the case of a clinical rotation would be associates with whom the person works with during the rotation.

As for the second part then the code of conduct is not binding. If the University is unable to enforce the code as it is written then the entire code is void, legally. Therefore the administration acted without cause, and therefore would be ruled against in any legal proceeding. Damn, ain't the law a bitch.

dmk