Most nurses also don’t have the time. It’s usually nursing assistants bringing you ice chips. Nurses do a lot of what many people might imagine to be a doctor’s purview, or for which they might not realize the complexity and importance. E.g., it’s not a doctor carefully cleaning and dressing your wounds so that you don’t develop a systemic infection, nor is the doctor watching your vital signs or adjusting intravenous medication infusion rates while your organs balance on a knife’s edge, nor is it a doctor who pumps you full of epinephrine to restart your heart after you’ve slipped off the mortal coil. Doctors diagnose and order the treatment, but nurses carry it out, and that too requires specialized knowledge and skills which necessitate intensive education. Ask any nurse, and they’ll tell you that nursing school was one of the hardest experiences of their life.

But that’s all kind of irrelevant to the issue, which is loan eligibility for graduate-level education for nurses. That is, for roles like nurse practitioners and nurse anesthetists, whose job functions and responsibilities significantly overlap with those of medical doctors. Much of the conversation in this thread, and the article itself, confuses that. Associate and bachelor level nursing degrees (the degrees held by most nurses, and the nurses doing the bedside care) weren’t eligible for the loans this rule impacts in the first place.

So my eyes, feet, and soul need professional care, but not my ears? Wild.

And my hope for humanity.

Appointees do have to be approved by the Senate, but we’ve already seen that the republicans are perfectly happy to rubber stamp anyone who will favor republican policies. I don’t know if the president could appoint himself, but I’d bet a republican-controlled senate would be happy to confirm him even if some law theoretically disallows it. The president cannot himself remove the justices through any mechanism of law (as if he cares about that), but justices can be removed by Congress via impeachment. I am not a lawyer, but I’m thinking a sufficiently corrupt congress/senate could make it happen.

It’s depressing how much of our government and legal system relied on the idea that at least most people would act in good faith.

I’m guessing the concern would be resolving them to the wrong address, either to censor or to serve disinformation.

Part of me wants to say we should save even more energy and just send him to CECOT. But to do so would mean being no better than him. I’m almost ok with that.

Owning a home or otherwise having stable housing doesn’t mean you don’t have or can’t develop debilitating mental health or drug issues. I’ve worked with many currently and previously high-functioning, well paid, housed individuals who have developed severe mental health or drug problems despite their economic security. Economic security and stable housing absolutely are protective factors which reduce the risk of developing such problems, but they don’t eliminate genetic factors, trauma, unexpected economic hardships, etc.

Source: I work with people who have severe mental illness and addiction problems, most of whom are currently homeless.

Not that you need more edits, but: racial *segregation was found unconstitutional.

And Ruby Bridges is still alive. She’s only 71 years old.

I’m a nurse, but work in a different speciality (psychiatry). I’m curious where you’ve heard 4-6 months? While he’s obviously not in a good state, he doesn’t look like imminent death to my only-peripherally-trained eye.