Paul's Passing Thoughts

John MacArthur Jr. has spoken on whether or not churches should defy lockdown orders. The transcript is at the end of this post if you care to read it. He believes Christians should submit to the lockdown. Missing is any instruction on how to obtain the “ordinary means of grace [salvation]” found only at church and efficacious for “growing in grace [salvation].” During normality, pastors pound the pulpit hard on the authority of the church and faithfulness to it being synonymous with being part of the body of Christ. But, during abnormal circumstances, some sort of doctrine that keeps the “salvation process” moving along is conspicuously missing. Why?

MacArthur states WHY Christians shouldn’t defy the order, But like many other pastors, offers no HOW on keeping the salvation process moving. And yes, Protestantism clearly teaches that salvation is a process found only in the church and not a onetime and for all-time finished event.

I think the answer is found in what I refer to as the “gospel of authority.” This is salvation by submitting yourself to the authority of men. This is also a vital element of ecumenicalism. Obviously, sound and consistent doctrine is not really the issue at all; the issue is submission to religious authority as religious authority defines it. Basically, you are saved by showing a “willingness to submit to godly men.” and “obeying God’s anointed.” And of course, “Men of God (a Protestant authority designation) have disagreed on doctrine for thousands of years.” Que, sera, sera.

And obviously, no fruit demonstrated by church says anything about church at all because it is full of “sinners saved by grace.” When a leader gets caught with both hands in the cookie jar, it’s because he was taken for granted and not prayed for enough. So, shut your damn mouth and put the tithe in the plate or some man of God will remove your salvation.

Apparently, during an abnormal time, your assumed submission to the “men of God” secures your salvation until church resumes. Primarily, this is probably demonstrated by mailing your tithes to the church. Tithing is one of the ordinary means of salvation, so it’s probably an unwritten law that tithing covers the other means of grace (like the Lord’s Table) until church resumes. Another ordinary means of grace, “sitting under gospel preaching (because as a Christian, you still need the gospel),” can be obtained by watching videos.

However, the one most likely to elicit a mass text message is tithing.

This post will not address the mass cognitive dissonance throughout the statement, but I will close with one mention. MacArthur touts submission to the authorities, but calls a defense of the Constitution on which that authority rests as “irrelevant.”

paul

John MacArthur on churches reopening despite government suggestions and policy.

Yeah, let me make very clear this question because it keeps coming up. If the government told us not to meet because Christianity was against the law, if the government told us not to meet because we would be punished, fined for our religion and our religious convictions, we would have no option but to meet anyway. And that takes you to the fifth chapter of Acts where the leaders of Israel said to the apostles, “Stop preaching.” And Peter’s response was very simple. He said, “You judge whether we obey God or men,” then he went right out and preached.

If the government tells us to stop worshiping, stop preaching, stop communicating the gospel, we don’t stop. We obey God rather than men. We don’t start a revolution about that; the apostles didn’t do that. If they put us in jail, we go to jail and we have a jail ministry. Like the apostle Paul said, “My being in jail has fallen out to the furtherance of the gospel.” So we don’t rebel, we don’t protest. You don’t ever see Christians doing that in the book of Acts. If they were persecuted, they were faithful to proclaim the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ even if it took them to jail; and that’s been the pattern of true Christianity through all the centuries.

But this is not that. Might become that in the future. Might be overtones of that with some politicians. But this is the government saying, “Please do this for the protection of this society.” This is for greater societal good, that’s their objective. This is not the persecution of Christianity. This is saying, “Behave this way so that people don’t become ill and die.”

Now you may not think that you’re going to have that impact on somebody, you’re not going to be the one that becomes a carrier and causes something to be passed on to somebody else down the road and somebody dies. You may think that’s going to be you. But you cannot defy the government. And I don’t think pastors should do this. You cannot defy the government and say, “We’re going to meet anyway because God has commanded us to meet, no matter what damage we do to people’s lives.”

I mean, what should mark Christians is mercy, compassion, love, kindness, sacrifice. How are you doing that if you flaunt the fact that you’re going to meet; and essentially you’re saying, “We disregard the public safety issue.” You don’t really want to say that.

That does not help the gospel cause.

What helps the gospel cause is to say, “Of course, we don’t want to be the cause of anyone’s sadness, anyone’s sorrow, anyone’s sickness, and certainly anyone’s death. So we will gladly comply. This is consistent with what Scripture says, that we are to live quiet and peaceable lives in the society in which we live. We don’t rebel, we don’t do protests, we don’t fight the government, we don’t harass and harangue, we don’t march, we don’t get in parades, we don’t stop traffic; we lead quiet and peaceable lives, and we pray for those in authority over us, and we submit ourselves to them.

In Romans chapter 13, Paul says, “You submit yourself to the government, the powers that be.” But Peter adds to that, “You submit yourself to the governor and the king,” whoever that personal authority is. I’ve heard people say, “Well, this isn’t constitutional.” That’s irrelevant. That is completely irrelevant. When you’re told by an authority to do something and it’s for the greater good of the society physically, that’s what you do because that’s what Christians would do. We are not rebels and we’re not defiant, and we don’t flaunt our freedom at the expense of someone else’s health.

How do we back out of that to communicate the love of Christ? Look, Jesus came and basically banished disease from Israel. He was a healer. The last thing the church of Jesus Christ would want to be is a group of people that lived in defiance and made somebody sick, caused somebody’s death. So you restrain yourself from that.

Again, the issue is so clear that even going back to Richard Baxter back in 1600s, Richard Baxter has a great section in one of his books where he says, “If the magistrate,” as he calls it, “asks you to refrain from meeting because of a pestilence, you do not meet. On the other hand, if the magistrate tries to force you not to meet because of persecution of Christianity, you meet anyway.” I think that’s the dividing line.

In this kingdom, issues of good and evil are pure pretense. As a culture, we pretend it matters and even use goodness for an argument when it fits our narrative. Don’t get me wrong, goodness and justice still matter to many people, but common goodness is not the driving force behind politics or religion in this kingdom. The driving force is control-lust because that’s the essence of sin. Freedom and slavery are dominant biblical themes.

Let’s define the present kingdom ruling on the earth. The Bible makes it clear that the kingdom of darkness presently rules. God’s kingdom has representatives here (“ambassadors”), and there is common goodness and justice because the works of God’s law are written on the hearts of every person born into the world, but the Bible also states, “We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.” Hence, the conflict we see between good and evil is a war between evil and good manifested in God’s creation and presence.

I am a rabid supporter of America because I really don’t want to live in another Dark Ages until Christ comes back and establishes His kingdom here on earth. In fact, Christ says we are to uphold justice and defend the weak until He returns. That means we defend American principles.

That brings us to presuppositions about mankind and reality itself. That determines your religion and politics. Let’s look at the least common denominator, reality; state of being. The philosophy of choice for the kingdom of darkness is Dualism. What’s that? The material world is evil, and the spiritual world is good with a strict dichotomy between the two. ALL things that can be sensed with one of the five senses is evil. But hold on, that also includes knowledge; all empirical knowledge is evil and a delusion. The cardinal sin is thinking you can know. So, the wise of this world, and wisdom itself, is defined as knowing that you cannot know.

Don’t confuse this with “worldly wisdom” and “spiritual wisdom.” Worldly wisdom has a practical use, according to Dualism, that serves selfishness. Cars are a wonderful invention, no? They enable us to zoom around at 50+ MPH etc., but on the other hand, they destroy the earth with carbon emissions…supposedly. Radical environmentalists are not crazy, they are driven by a succinct ideology. You, as a selfish individualist, are willing to satisfy self at the expense of the whole world. Man indeed is technologically able, but all of humanity’s earthly practical wisdom is for “consumerism” and other selfish motives.

So, according to this philosophy, good cannot really be known per se. Hence, seers, who are all wise because they know goodness cannot be known (Socrates), are qualified to lead us through the world of darkness for the best possible utopia that can be obtained. Utopia is the relinquishing of all concept of self and the individual with complete submission to the knowledge that man cannot know. It’s really an anti-humanity ideology and always has been.

This is where pretense is really important. The all wise must meet the unenlightened where they are at in their thinking. They must play along with the strong tendency of the commoners to think they can know things; particularly, the difference between good and evil. The all wise use a pretense standard until the pitiful commoners, those enslaved to the 5 senses, are indoctrinated.

Show me ANY church, and I will show you this doctrine. But first, let’s look at the political angle. We have Democrat women saying they believe Tara Reade, while also saying they are going to vote for Joe Biden anyway. This perplexes many people, while it does not perplex me in the least. Biden’s morals matter not; what matters is his presuppositions regarding mankind and reality. Is Biden going to invoke policy that makes individuals responsible for the sum and substance of their own lives, or is he going to demand total obedience to collectivist seers who will save the world and usher in utopia? This is about the mother-state versus a representative republic.

Last week, I was emailed information about the newest church scandal. It involves Cedarville University, again, which is right down the road from TANC Ministries. Apparently, if I read it right, the university hired a naughty person onto the staff who had been caught with both hands in the cookie jar, and as an old nurse mentor of mine often stated, “God only knows where those hands have been!” Then, if I understand my cursory reading of it, the university  lied about knowing the guy’s decadent resume, and that claim turned out to be a lie.

Obviously, the university didn’t care about the guy’s morals, because obviously, it doesn’t matter. However, they must now address the pretense standard critical for their survival. I have watched the game being played this way for what, forty years now? In “The Church Lie,” I devote all of chapter 7 to pretense standards and how they work. The good is defined by knowing how unable and totally depraved mankind is, and the church along with the Democrat party define it the same way.

Please, just stop going to church, and while you are at it, stop being a Democrat. Both share the exact same disdain for human life.

paul

I would like to begin this post with ground zero on marriage. This is from the perspective of children. In a marriage with children, the children find all of their security and trust in the family unit. A child’s worldview is formed by what he or she sees and experiences regarding the parental marriage.

I speak from firsthand experience, and I believe my experience speaks to a common rule. A child’s security comes from seeing the love, commitment, and trust between their parents. When parents divorce, certainty collapses within the children. Nothing, and no one can be counted on when the chips are down. Children of divorce will see the world through the eyes of pessimism.

With that said, sometimes divorce is necessary. In those rare cases, the circumstances should be used to show the ideal contrast. An ideal second marriage can rebuild a proper worldview within the children and a contrast to the first.

Susan and I did a series on marriage some time ago and it didn’t focus on fixing a bad marriage, it focused heavily on doing marriage right the first time. A large and very important part of parenting is equipping your children with knowledge to do a marriage right the first time. We should know what marriage is, and why we get married. Few people know the real what and the real why of marriage. The wedding vows are mere words spoken for tradition like the part where we feed each other cake.

In our day, marriage has become almost irrelevant. Primarily, the church is at fault for this. I became a church member in 1983, and even that far back, “members in good standing” who lived together out of wedlock was commonplace. Our society has vested most of its marriage etiquette in the church and looked to the church for all of the important principles.

But, the church had other priorities. Good marriages do nothing to increase the control churches have over people. Indeed, what church emphasizes is the “Bride of Christ” doctrine. The church is supposedly the bride of Christ, so, your faithfulness to the church makes you a faithful spouse to Christ. Marriage between you and your spouse is merely a “picture of the church,” and golly gee, it’s a plus if you have a good one. But, if it doesn’t work out, oh well, after all, “we are all just sinners saved by grace.” The important marriage is your marriage to Christ judged by your commitment to the church. In vogue of late is divorcees pointing to their wedding rings as now symbolizing their marriage to Christ. That’s just another church lie.

While the Bible dismisses under-law marriages that are terrible, but somehow commendable because “God hates divorce,” the fact that the Bible strongly applies a legal element to marriage cannot be denied. And, why is that? We will apply another example  using children.

Growing up, my brother had a friend from a very dysfunctional family. He was always spending the night with us and eating at our house and he was always welcome. I am sure he appreciated our hospitality, but how much security could be found in it? You have heard of people overstaying their welcome, right? How often did this young man feel like he was imposing on us? But, let’s say our family had adopted him legally; that changes the  ballgame totally, no? Now, the parents come forward and offer to be committed to him as much as their own children. Now he is secure, but the security comes through a legal commitment. Officially, my brother’s friend becomes my brother; this changes everything. Before, our family was his friend, now he is our family. In that, he is now secure. In that, he knows his presence is not imposing on us.

It’s really about commitment. And what I described above is little different from the gospel. Being adopted into God’s family goes way past God supplying your needs out of compassion, God is now committed to you as a child. God is love, but his love must be qualified. “Adoption” encompasses God’s mercy, compassion, and COMMITTMENT. The doctrine of adoption makes you secure as God’s literal family member.

The apostle Paul had a primary objective in his ministry; to make the Gentiles understand they were not mere guests of Israel’s house, but family. Paul wrote, “The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.” Paul also Calls Him the “Spirit of adoption” because we (Jew and Gentile) are baptized into the one body of Christ by His power.

This doesn’t mean that salvation comes by the law. Salvation is issued by God through believing The Promise. The new birth saves you, but like in the world, when you are born into the world, it gives you certain legal rights. However, remember, birth in this world gives you legal right to the world’s laws, the new birth into God’s family gives you legal rights to the laws of heaven and the commonwealth of Israel.

That’s what the Old Testament is. It’s a will. The will didn’t save you, but you obtained it by believing The Promise. The Promise is the good news. The Promise is the gospel. Nevertheless, the details of your inheritance are documented therein. You are now a legal citizen of God’s kingdom. And God has not only showed His love towards you, He has adopted you into His family. You are secure, and your security is documented in the courts of heaven with the Holy Spirit testifying. He stands there with you before the throne of God.

God truly loves the world, but for those who would be part of His family, he adds the force of law. You are not merely a recipient of His love and mercy, He petitioned the courts of heaven to adopt you.

There is no family apart from a legal commitment. You may very well help a beggar and that is an honorable thing, but you have not committed your life and belongings to that beggar. When you die, he will not receive your inertance.

Loving words and loving acts are indeed sweet, but going past the words, and even the actions, and committing your whole life to others is a whole other matter. It is a signed confession that there is no exit when the going gets tough. It is also a commitment to that person when you find out you cannot control them. It’s a funny thing, people avoid marriage because they don’t want to be controlled, but marriage is about the opposite. You have committed to that person whether you can control them or not.

These are not the exact words my daughter said to me the other day, but in essence, “The whole family knows you are insufferable, but we also know who we can count on when the chips are down.” I’m totally ok with that. In fact, I would love that to be on my epitaph. Nevertheless, in my endeavor to be more wise when people do come to me, when they do, which means they are in some really deep stuff at that point, I listen very carefully to what they say, and also others who share what they have said.

Let me share a reoccurring theme that I hear: women seem to think, by virtue of being the birth mother of a child, that the absence of marriage leaves her in total control of the child’s welfare. In other words, the lack of a marriage commitment is all about being in control by not being in a legal commitment with the father. Lack of trust much? Am I saying that a person who doesn’t want to be legally committed to someone might have baggage that is a red flag? That’s exactly what I am saying. Granted, the experience of a childhood divorce may foster trust issues. That’s why, if divorce is necessary, there must be a strong emphasis on repairing the damage to children. But the point here follows: commitment is all about giving up control, not obtaining it.

On the other side of the coin, Susan and I have counseled many men who became fathers because they are clueless. They are even content with being part time fathers on the weekends. At any rate, in many cases, we have children growing up in an uncommitted relationship. They are guests in an uncertain household. Love is more about personal politics for an individual agenda than commitment.  You piss me off, and all I have to do is pick one of Simon and Garfunkel’s “50 Ways to Leave Your Lover.” You see, a lover is a much different thing than being a family member. Commitment is what makes love more than a convenient action to pad one’s self-esteem. True love isn’t always fun. True love can be very messy.

Though love always has demonstrably more benefits than the cheap versions, playing the love game without commitment invariably puts one on the wrong side of the law. In the Old Testament law, our will, all sin is imputed to that law. When we are adopted, the law is executed and all sin imputed to the will is cancelled. All condemnation under the law is eradicated, and the law is now our guidance for loving God and others. Of course, no one would say we can love God with no commitment. No one respects a “fair weather friend.”

Whether you are a true child of God or not, putting children in a volatile, unstable, and uncommitted environment is very ill-advised. Christ put it this way: it would be better to have someone tie a millstone around your neck securely, and then jump into a lake. Don’t mess with children, God will hold you accountable and it won’t be pretty. Having children is a matter of liberty; please be sure of this: choosing to not have children is NOT immoral and does not in any way cheapen the value of your life.

But also be sure of this: jumping into parenthood without wisdom is a death sentence. Please don’t confuse the slow death of a miserable life with some dramatic formal execution. If you find yourself in the former; fix it, like yesterday. It is fixable. If you find yourself way in over your head, it may mean adoption in some cases. And by the way, by no means do professing Christians have the market cornered on wise parenting for reasons previously discussed in this article. Does that offend you? Then the only other choice is to step up to the bar. You can do it; God will help you.

Commitment is about being all in with no exit door. Even God thinks it’s important to do that in writing among witnesses. Don’t be fooled…

…a family without marriage is NOT a family.

paul

By Paul Dohse, TANC Publishing author and healthcare worker.

It’s Time to Remember What a Healthcare Worker Is 

Let’s talk about nurses dressed up in scrubs protesting against those who are protesting the lockdown. As healthcare workers we receive a lot of training on professional boundaries, but like all rules, they usually don’t include commonsense rules, which should be assumed.

This article is about how these protesting nurses have plowed over commonsense boundaries, particularly commonsense rules about hypocrisy.

Let’s first examine the specific argument and how the argument is communicated, which is surprisingly consistent, as if from one playbook. I initially ignored this nonsense in the beginning because the first protests of this type were obviously staged by political shills.  Real nurses have followed suit, and are using the same talking points. It goes like this:

“Today I stood on the Rhode Island State House steps, with just a few of my coworkers and other front line workers, to take a stand for health care, against those protesting to have the “stay-at-home” order lifted in Rhode Island.

I stood up today for my patients, my coworkers, my parents, my grandparents, my relatives, my friends and other loved ones.

I can proudly say we stood in silence, standing 6 feet apart, and we let our blue scrubs and face masks speak for us.”

Condescending much? News flash: scrubs, if they symbolize anything, symbolize care and treatment focus, not caste knowledge that ends an argument. But unfortunately, a smug, arrogant attitude, under the guise of love, is just the beginning of what makes this whole deal fraught with ignorance, self-aggrandizing, and over-the-top hypocrisy. As an STNA/MA-C that has invested heavily in advanced education and training to be the best I can be for serving nurses, I was first ashamed, now I am offended and ready to call them out.

The narrative being proffered suggests that hundreds of ICUs are a COVID apocalypse and the national lock-down is the only hope of ending the apocalypse. Granted, I don’t believe this is the flu, and I don’t believe it only kills people with underlying conditions. I agree, notions that downplay COVID annoy me; however, not commonsense discernment. Though the percentage is small, it kills people who should not be at risk at all. That’s what makes this virus scary. Couple that with the fact that it is highly contagious. I was told by one nurse, “Oh yes, by all means practice good standard precautions, but if it’s in this facility, you are going to get it.” I believe it is Russian roulette. Yes, you would have to imagine a very large revolver, but would you play if the cylinder held 1000 rounds instead of six? And, some ICUs are, in fact, a medical apocalypse because of this virus.

With that said, these protesting nurses are basing their protests on the idea that a COVID apocalypse is in full swing everywhere. Here in Ohio, where I live, two days ago, there were thirteen COVID deaths in the whole state, if they were COVID deaths. State and federal protocols for classifying a broad spectrum of deaths as COVID cases have been widely publicized. Yet, in Rhode Island, where these protesting nurses live, there have been 200 deaths out of roughly 7000 cases, and the deaths are almost entirely confined to nursing homes.

That makes this protest very cringeworthy, and pretty much indicative of the rest of the like-protests as well. ICU medical apocalypse, primarily the reality in New Jersey and New York, and certainly a horrible reality, is hardly the case in Rhode Island. Their protest, like many others around the country, suggest that they are driven by experiencing a New York like ICU experience. In their case, practically all cases are taking place in long term care facilities where our low-wage brothers and sisters have fled. That is, nurse aides (STNAs) making 12 dollars an hour. I speak personally to what kind of PPE you get in those places, and no in-house service on special precautions for this virus. All in all, this makes the nurses on the Rhode Island courthouse steps a “Paul and the hat moment.”

When I was a young boy, during the holidays, our family stopped by a friend’s house on the way to a large family gathering. I observed a candy dish in the foyer, and while no one was looking removed all of the contents and placed them under my hat (those goofy looking hats parents used to buy for their children in the 60s). We arrived at my grandparents’ house in Oakwood, Ohio and the family all gathered around in the foyer to meet us. At that moment, a phone call was received from the friend who complained that all of the candy was taken by someone. I was accused before the whole family standing there in the foyer, while I denied the charge profusely. The family looked at each other and shrugged their shoulders, and I was vindicated. My grandmother then asked for coats and hats to hang up, and without thinking, took my hat off resulting in the candy crashing to the floor. You could have heard a pin drop. Have you ever seen those “Want to get away?” Southwest Airlines commercials? Well, you have never seen one that good. I remember my embarrassment that night like it was yesterday, and regarding my embarrassment for protesting nurses, you can multiply it by ten. They have egregiously misrepresented what a healthcare worker is.

The narrative is furthered by a meme that shows a mob of people celebrating a nurse with a number of scissors sticking out of her back. It said something like: “Don’t praise us and then stab us in the back by protesting the lockdown.” This proffers the idea that while a total lockdown is the only hope against the ICU apocalypse, a bunch of fly-over hicks want to end the lockdown so they can go to WWE events which will invariably increase the carnage experienced by healthcare workers already on their way to dealing with post-traumatic stress. While the latter may be true of some healthcare workers in several ICUs, to protest according to that narrative on behalf of all healthcare workers is a perverted fraud.

Beside that, since when have healthcare workers not been sheep led to the slaughter by the healthcare system? Come now, we all know the best of us are totally expendable and always have been. It’s part of the job description. Yes indeed, what a shame that we would be “stabbed in the back” by people who have lost everything they have worked for all of their lives. What a shame that people who have lost their spouses to suicide are angry and frustrated. Future patients are now our enemies because, you know, the government and the healthcare system have always held us in the highest regard! Now, we must take sides for those who do so much right by us. Middle America Trump supporters are our enemies because they won’t swallow everything the government is handing down. You know, the same government that cannot even supply us with enough paper masks for a worldwide pandemic. Because, you know, pandemics are such a novelty.

This is healthcare: it is a singular focus on care needed at any given moment by any given human being. That can be a problem for us, because those in charge of our supply know we will bitch a lot, but ultimately we are going to treat people with whatever we have available because that’s what healthcare workers do.

We treat with whatever we have, and the reason the need is in front of us is completely irrelevant. As an STNA, the invalids I treat who are invalids because of their stupid choices get the same care as those stricken with cancer. We make life as good as it can be for individuals to the best of our ability with whatever we have. That’s what we do; that’s who we are. The end of a lockdown will overwhelm us and we are already overwhelmed? Even if that is true, what of it? That’s nothing new in healthcare. If not a premature lifting of a lockdown, it will be something else.

Those who took advantage of Florida allowing citizens to return to the beaches are now “#morons” on Twitter (FYI, sunlight kills viruses). Meanwhile, nurses out of work because they contracted COVID are getting time off charged against their PTO. Hail to the all-virtuous and all-knowing healthcare system. But the dark turn of events follow: protesting nurses are demanding those protesting the lockdown step-up and decline to be treated if they become infected. Presumably, if you don’t follow lockdown orthodoxy you don’t deserve treatment. Apparently, if you end up in ER with COVID, you better make sure they are aware of your support for the lockdown if you want adequate treatment. Someone has already created, as a meme, a waiver document for lockdown protestors. If you are against the lockdown, you don’t deserve treatment because you have stabbed healthcare workers in the back with scissors. But the fact of the matter is, no real healthcare worker has any room on their backs for an additional pair of scissors to begin with.

How an individual ends up under our care is completely irrelevant. Healthcare workers leave all of those judgments to God. Every one. At work, care is our only religion; care is our only brand of politics. And every care worker should know that only one person has our back: God himself. When the government or a healthcare system does something that shows appreciation for what we do through supply or good management, we are thankful, but since when do we expect it?

Let’s do a summary to this point before we move forward: the basis of the nurse protests misrepresent the reality of the crises, conflates their experience with those who are too busy saving lives to protest, presume to speak for all healthcare workers, and misrepresent what a healthcare worker is. Now we will move on to the hypocrisy of their actions.

Acute Care Versus Long Term Care 

Acute care workers have been the primary focus of accolades for those on the front lines of the COVID pandemic. We have seen the massive display of police and fire department recognitions for nurses and doctors changing shifts at hospitals. Here is where you haven’t seen such accolades involving dozens of police cars and emergency vehicles with lights flashing and the doling out of free food: in front of a nursing home. Yet, as well publicized, hospitals have dumped a lot of their COVID patients into nursing homes to be cared for by LPNs and STNAs. And, undoubtedly, uncertified caregivers who work in nursing home assisted living halls.

Full stop: while a real apocalypse is taking place in ICUs to some extent, there is also a much more widespread medical apocalypse taking place in nursing homes across the nation. Nursing homes, or long term care facilities, are being decimated. One LTC in New Jersey had to store deceased residents in a maintenance shed behind the facility.

Rhode Island is an interesting example. While acute care nurses are protesting on the RI statehouse steps, virtually all of the state’s COVID deaths are taking place in LTC facilities. In RI, this resulted in low-wage healthcare workers fleeing the facilities. If the hero acute care workers are taking time off from doing Tic Toc videos and protesting to fill the gaps in LTC facilities, we have no word of it.

In fact, the RI governor is asking for federal funding to increase the pay of LTC facility workers to at least twenty dollars an hour or more, and scheduling hiring events. Of course, the shortcut would be to hire furloughed acute care workers to fill the gap, but frankly, I believe many acute care nurses think they are above working in a LTC facility. If they don’t, news of their willingness to do so in the middle of this crises is certainly obscure. In New York, where NYC was endowed by the federal government with massive hospital overflow support and a gargantuan Navy hospital ship, COVID patients were dumped into nursing homes while the temporary hospitals were left empty.

If you have been vacationing on the moon for the past 20 years, you are unaware that LTC facilities are chronically understaffed to begin with. With all of the hysteria about “bending the curve” to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed, how often did you hear about a concern for nursing homes being overwhelmed? You didn’t. But yet, dumping COVID patients into nursing homes was the plan all along. In some LTC facilities, residents have been displaced to make room for them. This is a scandal of biblical proportions, and the point follows: the protesting nurses represent facilities that have done exactly what they are protesting against; ie., overwhelming a healthcare system with foolishness.

But, there is further insult to consider: already, LTC facilities are the focus of government investigations and law suits, because, you know, the government and state healthcare systems have our back, and are always our friends. Meanwhile, to bring acute care under such scrutiny is sacrilegious because acute care is the new 911 era heroes.

While ER doctors and nurses bemoan the difficulty of getting a grip on how to save people from this dreaded disease and proclaim the details of the ICU war zone with sackcloth and ashes, nothing at all was said about dumping COVID patients into ill prepared LTC facilities. In contrast, the outcry is against the lowborn protesting in front of the capital and lectures about staying at home.

Meanwhile, at LTC facilities, LPNs and STNAs ask, “We are now expected to deliver care under impossible circumstances, what else is new? And, after expecting the impossible they are coming after our licenses? That’s not new either.

All and all, the LTC facilities are being held together by the nurses and aides who are the real deal. Some are determined to do the work of two or three aides, others are visibly defeated, but know the defeated are better than nothing right now. I am not surprised there is a shortage of aides, I am surprised anyone would do the job period. Keep in mind, when the federal government shut down mental institutions, where do you think all of those people got dumped? Right, LTC facilities while STNAs received no mental healthcare training. Now we have “behavioral” units in LTC facilities. We also have dementia units, and rehab units for people who receive surgery at the hospital. LTC facilities are asked to do more and more with less and less. What’s the latest? COVID isolation units. It’s just the latest thing foisted on long term care.

With all of that said, NO LTC worker in their right mind would deny the paramount need for acute care nursing, I am just uncertain that the respect cuts both ways. It’s beginning to look like, to me, that acute care nurses need to get over themselves a little bit. Before now, I never gave that any consideration for a second until people started dressing up in scrubs to suggest that receiving care is only deserved by those who agree with the government. Please do it in brown uniforms with armbands instead; you don’t speak for those who know what the heart of healthcare is.

Furthermore, there is much irony in nurses lecturing the public about good health choices. There is much irony in nurses lecturing people about anything. I know many, many nurses in LTC and other venues. You are all awesome on the halls, but being a nurse does not qualify you for lecturing people about life in general and politics in particular. A lot of you smoke cigarettes regardless of the physiology classes you took, I really enjoy listening in on all of your boyfriend/girlfreind fails at the nurse station while I am charting, and I don’t mind working harder to bail you out when you are hungover, but let’s be honest, that’s why you need to focus on care.

That’s what you are good at; tyranny does not become you.

Paul Dohse

STNA/MA-C