Cry Havoc: A Fair and Balanced Account of the Amanda Trujillo Saga

Passion causes many of us to act quickly and write feverish blog posts either for or against an issue. Logic causes us to question what once seemed like rational and careful decisions and well-reasoned blog posts. Integrity forces us to be true to one’s self.

If I had the expertise and experience that Ms. GENEVIEVE M. CLAVREUL, RN, PH.D. has, I would like think that I would have been able to write blog posts that were constructed as beautifully and fair her piece “The Curious Case of Amanda Trujillo and the Arizona Board of Nursing: Cry havoc.” Of all the publications that have shared the story and weighed in with their personal opinion on the various circumstances of the case that was presented to them, Ms.Clavreul, RN, PH.D.’s writing gives the most fair and balance account of the situation based on the evidence and information that was given.

The Curious Case of Amanda Trujillo and the Arizona Board of Nursing

Cry havoc

BY GENEVIEVE M. CLAVREUL, RN, PH.D.

“Cry ‘Havoc,’ and let slip the dogs of war…”
– William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act III Scene I

This is the age of social networking. So many Americans (including nurses) receive the majority of their information via the Internet that it is no longer a phenomenon but a way of life, affecting everything from social trends to political movements. As a result, it has become very easy for even minor incidents to “go viral” almost overnight, garnering thousands of hits and hundreds of followers on websites like YouTube and Twitter.

Some of these viral trends have brought about positive change, promoting awareness of social ills or legal wrongdoings, but Internet activism also has a dark side, which rears its ugly head whenever the masses take up a cause without knowing all the facts. Soon, there are cries for action based on innuendo and knee-jerk responses.

What happens when the facts do come to light and show that the situation is not what it initially appeared? What if the “wronged” individual turns out not to be so blameless or an accused person proves to be genuinely innocent? How do we un-ring that bell?

Most of the time, the public’s short attention span seems to remedy such situations, quickly relegating the offending incident to the junk pile of history, but there are some cases that refuse to disappear, taking on a life of their own. One such case is Amanda Trujillo, an Arizona nurse whose story has become a cause célèbre in the online nursing community.
Meet Amanda Trujillo

For those who may be unfamiliar with the Trujillo case, here is a brief recap. In April 2011, Amanda Trujillo, an RN at Banner Del E. Webb Medical Center in Sun City West, Ariz., clashed with a staff physician after Trujillo provided a patient with information about the ramifications of liver transplant surgery and discussed the patient’s options for hospice care. The hospital fired Trujillo in May and filed a complaint against her with the Arizona State Board of Nursing (AZBN), claiming she had practice outside the scope of her duties and failed to uphold expected standards of care.

In December, Trujillo sent an email about the situation to various popular nursing bloggers. In her email, Trujillo said she was dismissed for attempting to educate a terminally ill patient who had consented to liver transplant surgery without ever being told about the details of the surgery and its aftermath or even that the patient might have other options for care. Trujillo maintains that all the information she provided was from the hospital’s approved materials and that she had documented everything for the doctor to follow up later. However, she said that after hearing that the patient was having second thoughts about their course of treatment, the doctor “threw a well-witnessed tantrum,” demanding that the hospital fire Trujillo and have her license revoked.

Trujillo said that she was fired without even receiving a hearing before the hospital ethics committee, and that because of the complaint against her, she has been unable to find other work, forcing her and her teenage daughter to go on welfare. She also said that the Arizona Nursing Association had been unwilling to support her, and that the blot on her record undermined her efforts to work with State Senator Nancy Barto (R-Scottsdale) on legislation intended to protect the rights of terminal patients and “define the role of the nurse in end-of-life teaching/counseling.”

Trujillo said that after reviewing her case, the AZBN’s nurse investigator had recommended that the complaint against her be dismissed, but the board had decided to go forward anyway, ordering her to face an administrative hearing in January of this year. Trujillo closed her email with a plea for readers to share her story as widely as possible.

Needless to say, Trujillo’s much-publicized letter evoked passionate responses from nurses. Who among us hasn’t worked with a doctor with a big ego who objected if a nurse so much as questioned his or her orders? I’ll never forget a neurosurgeon I once worked with who constantly yelled, threw tantrums and even hurled surgical instruments at nurses in the operating theater, but had never been disciplined because none of the nurses he abused were willing to report it. He was finally sanctioned after he slapped a patient, who had no problem filing a complaint against him. (After that, his behavior changed for the better!)
Hearing Both Sides

Naturally, Nurse Trujillo soon found many champions on the various nursing blogs, which is how I first learned of her story. As compelling as it was, I found much of her tale somewhat one-sided; at that point, the Arizona Board of Nursing had remained silent on the matter, as they were legally obliged to do. I decided to monitor Trujillo’s case closely, both online and in the formal proceedings.

That’s why my daughter found herself driving me to Phoenix in March to watch Trujillo’s administrative hearing. (The hearing was originally scheduled for late January, but was delayed two months after the AZBN demanded that Trujillo undergo a complete psychiatric evaluation.) The hearing room was packed, and although not everyone was there for Trujillo’s case, quite a few had come to show their support. You can imagine our surprise and dismay when we learned that Trujillo wouldn’t be attending, having requested a postponement because she had changed attorneys — something of which she’d failed to inform her many loyal followers and supporters.

The hearing room sat in stunned silence as a board member read the lengthy list of charges against Trujillo. Afterward, some interesting things began to take shape in the online community. Some of Trujillo’s defenders quickly renewed their condemnation of the “horrible and corrupt” board members, but others began to quietly question their support for a nurse they knew only through the Internet, email and telephone conversations. Expressing such doubts was risky: the supporters were quick to turn on those nurses who dared suggest that perhaps Nurse Trujillo was not the blameless martyr they had thought she was.

When blogger “Not Nurse Ratched” posted the complete notice of charges, she received a barrage of comments casting aspersions on her integrity and even implying that she had come by the document through nefarious means. (I found such comments rather ludicrous, since I had obtained a copy of the same document simply by requesting it from the AZBN — the list of factual allegations became public information after the charges were presented at a public meeting of the board.)
The Events in Question

When reading a tale of woe like Nurse Trujillo’s, it’s easy to have a visceral response. Trujillo presents herself as a caring nurse dealing with a dying patient who seemed lost and confused because the doctor had not provided enough information. Many of us have experienced something like this with our own patients or know of a colleague with a similar experience.           

Trujillo says she did her best to educate and advocate in accordance with the core principles of nursing, only to be verbally assaulted by the doctor for her supposed interference, and then discover that hospital management was unwilling to stand by her. However, the allegations presented by the board paint a very different picture. According to the official list of charges, the patient in question was actually being treated for a head laceration and fractured hip, and hadn’t even undergone an evaluation for liver transplant surgery; the doctor had postponed that evaluation until after recovery.

The complaint against Trujillo alleges that she attempted to educate the patient in the middle of the night (between 1:00 and 3:00 a.m.) while the patient “was under the under the influence of narcotics, recovering from hip surgery and exhibiting abnormal psychosocial status” and that as part of that “teaching,” Trujillo told the patient that after a liver transplant, “the transplant people will ask you things and hound you and hound you and you won’t be able to live alone anymore.”

That incident is only one of many cited in the board’s list of factual allegations, which also includes complaints related to Trujillo’s previous jobs at the Mayo Clinic and Valley Home Care in Phoenix and Mountain Vista Medical Center in Mesa, Ariz. Trujillo resigned from all three jobs in 2010 and is ineligible for re-hire at either Mayo Clinic or Mountain Vista. Trujillo is also accused of violating Arizona’s Nurse Practice Act by identifying herself as a DNSc-NP(s) “when [she] had not graduated with a DNSc degree, was not studying for a DNSc degree and was not licensed as a Nurse Practitioner in Arizona.”
Victim or Villain?

So, here we have two very different pictures. Which is the more accurate?  If you are a supporter of Nurse Trujillo’s, the AZBN is on a witch hunt, out to destroy a good nurse who is guilty of nothing more than advocating for her patient and doing what any nurse is expected to do. Her detractors see a nurse with a checkered past who engaged in questionable actions against hospital policy, and who is now manipulating the Internet to sway public opinion.

If you believe that Nurse Trujillo is completely blameless, you might ask yourself this: Even if the hospital is determined to get Trujillo’s license pulled, as her supporters claim, what about the patients, whose stories suggest that Nurse Trujillo might indeed have overstepped her authority? The patients don’t have a dog in this hunt, so what motive would they have to corroborate the AZBN charges?

Then there’s that pesky allegation that when Trujillo and her attorney were provided with the names of fellow nurses who had given statements to the board about the complaints, Trujillo contacted three of those witnesses by phone, text or email and threatened to sue them for defamation. Perhaps those nurses had an axe to grind, but if so, wouldn’t it have been simpler for them to tell the investigators nothing, rather than risk a defamation lawsuit?
To Be Continued

Amanda Trujillo’s tale is far from over. Her case was not on the docket of the AZBN meeting in April, but she has whipped up such a frenzy in the nursing community that the board has been bombarded with calls, letters and emails — many of which have been described to me as heated and impolite. Trujillo’s story has truly lit up the nursing blogs, websites and LISTSERVs in a fashion rarely seen. But is she a victim or is she an artful dodger, tugging at our collective heartstrings to further her cause?

Some observers have speculated that Trujillo’s aggressive use of the Internet to publicize her plight may have caused the AZBN to pursue her case with extra diligence, which may or not be true. However, just as everything Trujillo has posted can be used to advance her cause, much of it can also be used against her. In fact, several of the charges against Trujillo are directly related to her online publicity campaign, including allegations that her public statements violated the confidentiality of her patients.

At this point, we can only sit back and wait for the next AZBN hearing and Trujillo’s next salvo. Whichever side you may fall on in this discussion, it’s quite apparent that Nurse Trujillo has successfully cried “Havoc” and let slip the Internet’s dogs of war. Whether she will be successful in her defense — and what will happen afterward — we must all wait and see. 

To Express an Opinion About this Article, please visit our Facebook Page

www.facebook.com/WorkingNurse

Had I had the instincts to do so, I would have much rather written a piece as well composed, researched, and thought out as the above article. The reason being, after further examination of the original letter Amanda Trujillo publicly shared, as well as conflicting information she later divulged, the original details of the story are not at all what she had lead the nurse blogosphere to believe.

To start, the patient was not going to have a transplant the next day. They were there for a hip surgery. The “education” session that was reported as intended to help the patient occurred at 1am while the patient was confused, scared, and taking narcotics. Again, I repeat, the patient was not in the hospital for a transplant, as Amanda herself lead everyone to believe.

Take a moment to read the original Amanda Trujillo letter that got us all excited and see the inconsistencies for yourself. The only editing I did was to remove a line that identified the actually date and unit that the patient was treated on to prevent HIPAA violations from occurring.

I will be leaving up the articles I wrote in support of Amanda. I wrote those articles with the information and the assumed truths I had been told at the time. Being trusting is a mistake that I just cannot help but make. Those of use who are honest will assume others are honest.

It will never be my intention to throw another nurse under the bus or cause them any harm, but it always my intention to put the needs and safety of the patient first. Remember, The Nerdy Nurse is a Patient, Nurse, and Technology Advocate. Patient is the first word in my tagline for a reasons.

Because of my need to protect patients first, I felt it necessary to share article with you.

For more information:

Read the AZ BON Allegations Against Amanda Trujillo

The article highlighted here: The Curious Case of Amanda Trujillo and the Arizona Board of Nursing: Cry havoc

Beth Boynton, RN, MS weighs in: Red Flags & Questions I See in the Amanda Trujillo, ARNP Case

Please sound off on your opinion of the Amanda Trujillo case with the new information that has been revealed.

Comments

  1. says

    Regarding the false use of credentials: I’ve read that the lower case “s” means she is representing herself as a student of a NP-PhD program. Is this even legal? I remember professors pounding into our heads that you don’t dare put letters after your name until you’ve earned the degree or certification. I have never heard that you can use a lowercase “s” to represent yourself as a student. I have one class left to earn my BSN, but I have never put BSN(s) after my name. I simply state I’m a BSN student or candidate. Just looking for clarification because I’ve never heard of this.

  2. says

    I have silently watched and read the amazing roller coaster of events. I’m saddened by the massive blow of uncertainty that has fallen upon our profession, not just by the original content but by the reflex reaction by most of the nursosphere & blogosphere.
    I think you hit the nail on the head, if you can’t trust a nurse.. who can you trust? I think that’s why we are in this state of flux now is because of our innate nature of trusting and trustworthiness.
    The battle continues….

  3. Geneviève says

    As the old saying goes, it takes a big person to admit that they may have made a judgment in error; and Brittney in her post does an admirable job doing just that – kudos.
    In today’s heated climate where so many are concerned as being seen as “flip-floppers” or unable to stick to our guns, there’s no shame in when presented with new facts or additional reliable information that we can in good conscience change our minds and opinions. This case is true with Nurse Trujillo and just as one can support her based on the facts presented by her, one can also when presented with new information, actions, contradictory information and so forth choose to retract that support.

    I know that this wasn’t an easy choice, as Nurse Trujillo and many of her most ardent supporters are quite vociferous in their support and quick to take to the Internet to counter what they believe are specious charges. I know that Brittney struggled with her decision, especially in light of her early support and efforts on behalf of Nurse Trujillo.

    Brittney shouldn’t doubt her resolve first when she offered her support based on what she knew at the time – as it was an earnest and heartfelt support of a fellow nurse. Nor, should she feel remorse for changing her position based on new information that she has gathered or that has come her way. In her post she offers a reasoned explanation and that should be commended and respected.

    • says

      Hello Genevieve,

      We each make our own decisions, I do not hold Brittney’s or anyone elses against them.

      However, when those new facts, or reliable information surfaces, kindly let us know.

      If you are referring to the AZBON charges, then you need to learn a bit more about how they are formulated, presented.

      This position statement from RNGuardian sheds light based on the BON cases they’ve defended. This described how Amanda feels about the AZBON charges to a T.

      “While outrageous and seemingly unjust, Amanda’s situation is not unique. I have stacks and stacks of files in my office with Accusations from the California BRN which include horribly damning language against the nurse, much of which, according to the nurse, is stretched, fabricated, embellished or just downright wrong. These accusations are not sent to me by the client. They don’t have to be subpoenaed. They aren’t sent to our lawyers because we are the named counsel of record, no. They are public record easily accessible on the BRN’s website for everyone including my grandma and 11 year old son to read. Keep in mind, at this stage they are still only ACCUSATIONS. Nothing has been proven, but regardless, the accusation with its condemning statements is there for all to see. What about being innocent until proven guilty? Is this a fair process? Or is this abuse?”
      http://www.nurseup.com/position.statement.rnguardian.jennifer.coalson.perez.htm

  4. craigbrn says

    The issue isn’t so much Amanda being right or wrong.

    This has been a educational experience for all, or can be. The whole social media thing is new enough, and I don’t really think that Amanda had any clue what to expect when she wrote that letter to Echo Heron. If it comes down to it, I don’t even fault Amanda for not telling the whole truth. We all make mistakes and I don’t know a nurse who hasn’t made a bad decision in their career that that seems to be the right choice at the time and try to paint the best picture possible.

    The people who latched onto the issue and blew it all up out of proportion are the ones that need to take the blame. There were Authors, and others who used to issue to bring their causes, products and whatever to the forefront in order to make some money or get their own 5 min of fame.

    The nurses who blog and are attempting to be journalists are for the most part new to the whole concept of journalism and the people who read them, don’t always understand the difference between opinion and reporting of facts. People who do it for a living have a hard time. Just watch network news for proof of that every day.

    The other issue that some have learned over this is that it’s dangerous to put a face to an issue, when there are questions. The whole Amandagate thing raised some serious issues. Issues of possible conflict of interest, issues that showed the lack of understanding of the administrative process of Boards of Nursing, and probably one that is dear to most of our hearts, lateral violence.

    We all made some poor choices in how we talked and presented the whole issue. Let learn and move on, and maybe make better choices next time.

  5. says

    I don’t think there is anything wrong with trusting a person when they say they are in need of help. I am a nurse in Arizona and I will say that I certainly don’t have any love for our Nursing Board as they are far to politically motivated for my taste, that being said it is very easy to make them out to be the bad guys in this case. I initially threw my support in with Amanda and living here in the State where this drama was playing out it was very easy to get pulled into her story. I do read Nurse Ratched ‘s blog and she had to stop and do some thinking at some point. Why was Amanda feeling the need to push her story so hard on every available medium? And then the inconsistencies began to filter out, this is a small nursing community and no one’s secrets are safe here.

    I am still on the fence, perhaps Amanda’s heart was in the right place and she truly felt that she was doing the right thing. But perhaps she should have been honest enough to put ALL the facts out there before she started her campaign, she should have know that these other facts would come to light at some point in time. I am waiting to see if and how she explains what has come to light. I am also still curious to know why the AZBN required a psych eval, as they have not been entirely clear about their justification for it.

    Overall as a nurse working in AZ I am following this case with intense curiosity and a new sense of cynicism for both sides on this matter.

    • says

      Much to the surprise and dismay of those providing testimony to Amanda’s past, they are each being subpoenaed and will need to put their statements on the record under oath.

      Wonder how many “Factual Allegations” will stand the test of scrutiny?

      Seems that far too many people have decided she is “Guilty Until Proven Innocent.”

      Not so fast I say.

      • says

        Again the responses of the “blind” followers of Amanda show a basic misunderstanding of the basic tenents of administrative law.

        The “factual Allegations” will stand scrutiny. That’s what the evidenturay hearing is about. The question is the interpretion of the allegations. The comment about if she is clearly at fault, why is it taking 15 months. In these type of cases, there is no hurry from their perspective. Just like in criminal cases, it works for the plaintiff to stall and stretch things out. This as I have stated over and over, not a criminal case, but an ADMINISTRATIVE one. Hersay is allowed in administrative law. It’s about the preponderance of evidence, not beyond a shadow of a doubt.

        When I go back and look at those origional posts, the comments had nothing to do about her being guilty or inocent of anything. The comments were as you put it “no so fast”.

        As to fact checking. Andrew, shame on you. You know as well as everyone else that selectivly excluding inrormation, is dishonest. If she had presented the whole story, this would have gone away, quickly. If she had written in the letter. “I was taking care of this patient with a broken hip, who had liver failure. She was confused and drugged on morphine which I gave here, it was 3am and I gave her 250+ pages of information” She would have gotten no response from anyone.

        • says

          Craigbrn wrote: “If she had written in the letter. “I was taking care of this patient with a broken hip, who had liver failure. She was confused and drugged on morphine which I gave here, it was 3am and I gave her 250+ pages of information” She would have gotten no response from anyone.”

          Is that the real story Craig, or what Del E. Webb Medical Center is claiming? Just like they lied when they claimed she needed a doctors permission for the consult? The consult clearly coded under “Nurses’ Orders” in the Cerner computer system?

          That “factual allegation” is also being examined, scrutinized. Excuse me if I question the truthfullness & credibility of her former employer.

          • says

            Nerdy. I apologize for hijacking your blog, but I can’t resist. This can be a teachable moment.

            FIRST I have opinions and yes prejudices based upon my history and education.

            I don’t know how much of either side of the story is correct. Amanda may be 100% correct and 100% the victim here. But she could be 100% in the wrong. I don’t know and guys and galls, Neither does Andrew or Vern, they have beliefs based upon their prejudices. Yes when I was bored, I enjoyed baiting both of them, trying to get them to say something in public that I can hold against them later. I apologize to the internet for that, and to Nerdy. I’m pretty sure I probably said something bad about her in one of my attempts. I lost my professionalism. The lesson of this is, don’t get angry at people online, when you find that happening, shut the computer off and walk away. Every time they got angry at me, they said something on twitter, that I could have used against them.

            This whole episode can be a learning moment. Not the one that Amanda wanted, but a learning moment all the same.

            I am NOT a lawyer, I didn’t play one on TV, and I didn’t stay at an Holiday Inn Express last night. What I am, is a nurse, who has been working with lawyers defending RN’s, MD’s and other health care workers in malpractice cases, professional license cases, and even a couple criminal cases. I admit up front that I’m a cynic and I believe that Gregory House, MD was an optimist.

            The one thing that Amanda will have going for here is the fact that government attorneys at that level, in general, aren’t Johnny Cochran. They may be good lawyers, but they are busy, underpaid and overworked. As I looked back at my post I realize I had miss typed. I had intended to say that the “factual Allegations” will have to stand up to scrutiny. That is what the hearing is going to be about. Depending on the competence of her legal team, they may have an easy time discounting the whole thing. It is going to be very hard.

            I’ve said it many times before. That the “computer let me place the order” isn’t necessarily a solid legal footing. It may be correct, but by itself, it’s not. There has to be a policy and procedure to support it, as well as the appropriate authorization in the nurse practice act. I can’t say to either. I haven’t seen the hospital policy, and I’ve not seen what the AZ nurse practice act allows. Unfortunately for Amanda, it maybe the old “camel’s nose under the tent flap” syndrome. It may not have been “outside scope of practice” but now that the can of worms is open, you can’t put them back. They could rule that Amanda in fact didn’t act outside her scope of practice, and still censure her on “unprofessional conduct”. I won’t begin to predict the AZ BON, or any BON for that matter, no matter how many times I’ve sat in front of them in support of nurses in administrative hearings. Judges and Jury’s are easy to predict, compared to BON’s. Unprofessional conduct is notoriously hard to defend against.

            I went back and looked at the letter that Amanda wrote to Echo Heron. The one line

            “Back in April of this year I was caring for a dying patient whom I had discovered had no clue about what they were about to participate in when they agreed to get a major invasive surgery. ” and “(complex lifetime daily self care)” Which to me says transplant and not hip surgery but Andrew you are correct. She didn’t say in black and white that the patient was going to be getting a transplant or start transplant workup in the AM.

            Of course this line by Amanda’s lawyer pretty much takes the sails out of the response by Andrew’s (NurseFriendly) argument.

            “After assessing and communicating with the patient, Ms. Trujillo’s evaluation led her to believe that the patient did not fully understand what (pt) had consented to when (pt) agreed to go forward with an intensive transplant evaluation scheduled to begin at Banner Good Samaritan Medical Center the following day.”

            Those lines that iare being used against Amanda. EVERYONE take this to heart. If you are ever an any situation, even remotely like this. SAY NOTHING to anyone but your LAWYER. Not your pastor, not your BFF, and definitely NOT the internet. Nothing ever goes away on the internet, even if you delete it, it can always be found, and used against you. This is the one area, that TV get’s it right. This is even more so in Administrative law, than in criminal law. So the question has come up, why was she counseling a patient, who was getting orthopedic work, vs a transplant on end of life subjects? It maybe that Amanda just misspoke herself in the letter. But under administrative law, it’s going to be harder for her legal team to get that thrown out. Possible, but difficult. And for what it’s worth, even if the Del Webb version is wrong, it’s going to be hard to stand up to that. The letter could have been written in a couple of different way’s to get the support of a famous nurse author in pursing stronger legislation without giving up her equivalent “right to remain silent”

            Del Webb also obviously underestimated Amanda. If they had just fired her, this would probably have gone away 15 months ago. I can imagine the person who decided to turn it into the BON, hitting their head on the desk.

            It is common for employers in all states to report nurses who’s employment has been terminated to the BON. I know there is at least one state that requires that. For those of you who are tilting at that windmill, that’s another plank for your platform.

            So what do you DO if you find yourself in shoes like Amanda’s. Talk to your lawyer and don’t say anything to anyone without your legal team approving it.

            As to the RNGuardian “position statement” which isn’t really a position statement, i have to shake my head. if that’s all it was, I’d say OK, whatever. But again as an educational moment, if you track back their posts, they are advertising a subscription service, to “protect” you from something like this happening to you. It’s about credibility. I personally don’t believe in subscription services like that. But I did a search and the attorney and the actually legal firm behind RNGaurdian, is a real legal entity, and appears to be doing a good job of actually defending health care providers. You’d have to check the local bar association and BBB to find out specifics.

            A word of hope out of this. If she gets out of this, her career as a nurse doesn’t have to be over. She’ll have a difficult time getting a job in a hospital, but then again, she’s stated that she never wants to work in that environment again. It will be hard, and she’ll have to be creative. But that goes for all of us too. it may not be the job you want, were you want it, but if you find yourself in similar shoes. Take a deep breath and look around with open eyes. There is work out there. Amanda is taking the time to write, if that’s a talent you have, then go for it. You’d have to ask Echo Heron, how much she made as an author vs a critical care nurse, but I’m sure she made some money out of it. It’s possible to make a living blogging. Not as easy as some would have you believe, but it is possible

            It may be the motivation to get out of nursing. I’ve seen many posts stating that if they hadn’t invested so much time and money, they would get out. This might be the time.

            As long as there is life, there is hope

  6. says

    Thank you for posting this. I am so out of the loop with current events that by the time I am finally current, it is ancient history!

    • says

      Nope, not ancient history, at all. The Arizona State Board of Nursing continues to drag their feet on her case. If she was clearly at fault, anyone like to explain why they need 15 months to make a decision on it?

      She is currently awaiting a date for an evidentiary hearing on the current charges.

  7. says

    I was outraged at first and in support of Amanda. But red flags began to appear in her story and I also didn’t care for some of the inflammatory comments, generalizations and pressure I felt from one visible colleague to support her. (Not you, Brittney). This is a major turnoff for me personally and professionally. I have learned to trust my intuition, take some time, and value my own opinion while trying to stay open to other perspectives. Working towards fair and respectful treatment of nurses is a good thing. This was just a little detour in the process. Good for you for taking action and good for you for staying open to new information and processing your own feelings and then taking action again!
    Beth

  8. says

    I stopped supporting her for the very reasons outline in this blog, she proved not to be truthworthy when she gave false information in writing her letter. There was no liver transplant in progress….

    Blatent lies. It made anything and everything else she said…questionable. I was done at that point.

    • says

      You are right. I wish I would have read it more critically. It was foolish of me to trust so blindly.

      If you can’t trust a nurse, who can you trust?

      PS. LOVE your gravatar!

      • says

        You blindly trusted…as many of us do but you had the integrity to post an honest follow-up. You didn’t stick to your original view as many stubborn people do. You changed your view after hearing more information. And then you went so far as publicly stating that you may have mistakenly supported her in the first place. The fact that you strongly supported her to begin with shows us that you have a huge heart and much passion for your specialty. You also believe that people are honest and even though we may be fooled at times and end up with egg on our faces, I would rather be a person who believes in the good of people first and foremost rather than assuming everyone is lying to me. When the story changed, you came forth with integrity. I respect you for all of this. And in the end…I do believe the truth will come out and justice will prevail. But that may be me believing in the good again. =))

      • says

        Just curious Brittney, you do know that Amanda is not, has never claimed to be an ARNP don’t you?

        Didn’t it bother you in the least when choosing articles to reference that Beth Boynton’s article on “Red Flags” is misleading people from the get go? If she chose not to be accurate in the title of her blog post, how much else did she chose not to be accurate about. Pointed that out on her blog, yet the misleading title remains. A disa

What's on your mind?