In my last election day post, I passionately discussed Question 3 and what it meant. It was easy to write about that one. I’m very passionate about a person’s basic human right to dignity. I’m very passionate about supporting the rights of the LGBT community. I could write 1000 posts on why transgender discrimination is something that is a big problem. I’m also against fearmongering. So, I was eager to explain what the yes or no vote meant on Question 3. Here is the post, in case you were interested. I also promised that I would address the other questions on the ballot. There are only 3 this year, so it isn’t too bad.

Well… except that I’m still not 100% clear on what I’m going to do about Question 1. What this law aims to do is to limit the amount of patients that are assigned to registered nurses. There are a lot of complexities to this law, as seen here. By voting “Yes” on Question 1, you are voting for officials to regulate how many patients a nurse is responsible for while a “No” vote changes nothing. It seems pretty straight forward.

The problem for me is that I see both sides of it. More personalized care is better for the patient. This could help prevent mistakes. This helps nurses better do their jobs, which is not just about being a medical professional but a caring and empathetic professional that can take care of their patients on a deeper level than a doctor often will. My best friends are in the medical field: one is a nurse and one will be (but may as well be one already). I know no matter what, they will help me through anything. And I know that this is something that they share with every one of their patients. Nurses are more than the glorified secretaries and assistants to doctors like you see on television. They are on the front lines every day, making every patient feel as comfortable as they possibly can be. They certainly deserve a lot more credit than they seem to get. I feel like this will also help to ensure that patients get the attention that they need, which can only help to save lives.

I also see the downsides. I don’t like forcing a lot of regulations, though I’m not so against them that I don’t see the need for them in a lot of cases. A nurse should know their own personal limits. Everyone has their own limits. Some are capable of taking on more patients while still offering stellar care while others may not be able to. It doesn’t mean that one nurse is better than the other. I can only handle so many article assignments every day, but that doesn’t mean that I’m a terrible writer (Maybe a bad example). I just know the limit before my work becomes a hot mess. Letting nurses make this decision for themselves on a case by case basis could be a much better approach. There is also the fact that this could easily cause wait times to increase and for costs to rise. Maybe if the millionaires running the hospital took a cut, they could afford the nurses without making patients pay more. However, they are greedy and like being multi-millionaires who run a business. Because to them, a hospital is a business.

Since I can completely get both sides of the argument, I’m completely lost. I’m a logical person, but I feel like the flaw here is that the logical choice is going to get ruined by people. Because people ruin everything. I’ll gladly listen to arguments on both sides to help me come to a decision, but it may be a gut instinct vote as I get into the election booth.