Today Governor Cooper announced that North Carolina's stay at home order will not end with April's calendar but will extend until May 8th. Even then, if things continue to improve, not everything will open at all once but in gradual steps.
The pros & cons of all of this:
I know of four people who have lost loved ones during this pandemic (all four non-virus related), and none of them have been able to hold a funeral. That's not right. That's emotional cruelty.
And I know someone in a nursing home. She is hard of hearing and very forgetful. She keeps getting in trouble for leaving her room. While she doesn't usually have many visitors, she does enjoy getting together with her friends living near her for game time. She is now deprived of her only social interaction. That is cruel.
In Alabama, my friend Misty has a benign brain tumor that cannot be removed because it is deemed a "non-essential" surgery. My aunt cannot have her shoulder cuff repaired, even though she cannot lift her hand above her waist or pick up anything with her arm. The hospital says it is not an essential surgery. In TN a friend from college was not able to see his optometrist even though as a diabetic he should be seen immediately if his eyesight changes. And I've heard from many people here in NC who have been unable to see doctors about issues. I'm so thankful a nurse took Bobby's situation seriously last week and advocated for him with a doctor so he could be treated. I was thankful a surgeon saw him today to remove the drain and allowed me in to ask questions. But I am a tad bit concerned about the fact that whether or not he is seen in a month for the follow-up is up to us. If we see certain things then we go back; if we don't, we can call and say everything is good. They want to limit the number of patients coming in. And while I think I can handle that, I am neither a nurse nor a doctor. What if I think things are okay and they're really not? When we are sacrificing the healthcare of so many to make sure we have the capabilities of treating the ones who "might" get sick, is that healthcare? Should we not simply have larger hospitals or plans in place to handle high volume times instead of refusing to treat people with serious needs? At what point is avoiding preventative care inviting problems in the future? Is refusing to treat a patient when you have the facility and the ability not a violation of the doctor's oath?
I understand there are places where the volume is so overwhelming that hospitals cannot handle it. But here in NC, the state has over 9,000 hospital beds and less than 500 people hospitalized with the virus. Where is the overrun?
I know from working the elections that people not familiar with the process often make comments that we are overstaffed or not doing our jobs. I remember the year when in my training cycle I questioned my trainer why I could not open certain spots up for voters. Her answer was that if we did, then those stations would not be in available to do their job when needed. I didn't reply, but I was thinking those spots had not been used all day. But sure enough, ten minutes later every single one of those stations I had wanted to use all had a line for their designated tasks. What we saw and observed at the hospital last week might not be the whole picture. I would never want to overwhelm the doctors and nurses who are helping those in need. But I can't help but wonder if there is not a better way.
I will probably be withdrawing from Facebook quite a bit the next few days. There were way too many mean-spirited and disrespectful, if not hateful, posts today after the press conference. Whether or not I voted for our Governor is irrelevant. Whether or not I agree with his policies is not the issue. He is our elected official, and if we as Christians truly believe that God raises up and demotes our rulers, then he is due our respect whether we like him or not. He is a created being of God and our leader, and we are subject to our government.
And at this point...it's only one extra week. For now.
The pros & cons of all of this:
- The health care system will not be overwhelmed and they can continue to acquire medical supplies for those treating the virus. The health system may be somewhat strained, but when nurses at hospitals are not working full shifts and many offices are closed, it is hard to say they are overwhelmed. There are many people who need treatment or care but are not getting it because doctors are not opening their offices. Those who do seek care are treated in a crazy manner if they have a fever, even though multitudes of things cause a fever, not just this virus.
- People who have the virus but aren't showing symptoms won't continue to expose wide ranges of people to the virus. Watching people at the grocery store and the produce center is enough to convince me that people will not/are not social distancing on their own. Only people suspected of having the virus are being tested so there is no way to know who has it, who is immune to it, and who may or may not come down with it. We don't live in fear and radically alter our lives during flu season even though many people do not get vaccinated, so why are we panicking so much over this?
- Small businesses that can't afford the extra cost of social distancing and constant cleaning to protect themselves and their clients aren't open. Some small businesses are doing curbside pickup or deliveries only because there is no way to pay the salaries of all the employees necessary to clean behind the public and limit the number of customers. It's financially not feasible to open. Others are willing to take the risk, but that leads us back to point number one.
- Nay sayers have a command to practice common sense. It all comes back to the age old question, "What is the role of government?" If it is to protect the health and welfare of the public, then to some degree this is answer. (but not totally...see point one). If people are truly free to do as they wish, open their business as they will etc, and the general public is truly concerned about the spread of this virus, then they will choose to stay home and the deterioration of the economy will still happen but it won't be because of a government mandate. But it also leads back to the pro of the first point.
I know of four people who have lost loved ones during this pandemic (all four non-virus related), and none of them have been able to hold a funeral. That's not right. That's emotional cruelty.
And I know someone in a nursing home. She is hard of hearing and very forgetful. She keeps getting in trouble for leaving her room. While she doesn't usually have many visitors, she does enjoy getting together with her friends living near her for game time. She is now deprived of her only social interaction. That is cruel.
In Alabama, my friend Misty has a benign brain tumor that cannot be removed because it is deemed a "non-essential" surgery. My aunt cannot have her shoulder cuff repaired, even though she cannot lift her hand above her waist or pick up anything with her arm. The hospital says it is not an essential surgery. In TN a friend from college was not able to see his optometrist even though as a diabetic he should be seen immediately if his eyesight changes. And I've heard from many people here in NC who have been unable to see doctors about issues. I'm so thankful a nurse took Bobby's situation seriously last week and advocated for him with a doctor so he could be treated. I was thankful a surgeon saw him today to remove the drain and allowed me in to ask questions. But I am a tad bit concerned about the fact that whether or not he is seen in a month for the follow-up is up to us. If we see certain things then we go back; if we don't, we can call and say everything is good. They want to limit the number of patients coming in. And while I think I can handle that, I am neither a nurse nor a doctor. What if I think things are okay and they're really not? When we are sacrificing the healthcare of so many to make sure we have the capabilities of treating the ones who "might" get sick, is that healthcare? Should we not simply have larger hospitals or plans in place to handle high volume times instead of refusing to treat people with serious needs? At what point is avoiding preventative care inviting problems in the future? Is refusing to treat a patient when you have the facility and the ability not a violation of the doctor's oath?
I understand there are places where the volume is so overwhelming that hospitals cannot handle it. But here in NC, the state has over 9,000 hospital beds and less than 500 people hospitalized with the virus. Where is the overrun?
I know from working the elections that people not familiar with the process often make comments that we are overstaffed or not doing our jobs. I remember the year when in my training cycle I questioned my trainer why I could not open certain spots up for voters. Her answer was that if we did, then those stations would not be in available to do their job when needed. I didn't reply, but I was thinking those spots had not been used all day. But sure enough, ten minutes later every single one of those stations I had wanted to use all had a line for their designated tasks. What we saw and observed at the hospital last week might not be the whole picture. I would never want to overwhelm the doctors and nurses who are helping those in need. But I can't help but wonder if there is not a better way.
I will probably be withdrawing from Facebook quite a bit the next few days. There were way too many mean-spirited and disrespectful, if not hateful, posts today after the press conference. Whether or not I voted for our Governor is irrelevant. Whether or not I agree with his policies is not the issue. He is our elected official, and if we as Christians truly believe that God raises up and demotes our rulers, then he is due our respect whether we like him or not. He is a created being of God and our leader, and we are subject to our government.
And at this point...it's only one extra week. For now.
Comments