State shouldn’t close John de la Howe School
To the editor:
Thank you, Bill Davis, for your article on John de la Howe in the March 10 issue of Statehouse Report. I appreciate the coverage you’ve given to the agency, and I’ve enjoyed reading your email newsletter over the past several years.
I serve on the Board of Trustees of the John de la Howe School and would like to provide some additional background information. … Here’s the link to the article in the March 6 Greenwood Index-Journal about the LOC hearing: http://www.indexjournal.com/news/In-defense-of-John-de-la-Howe-20171324
And here’s the link to the article in the March 7 Index-Journal about the proposed Governor’s School of Agriculture, Biotechnology and Research at John de la Howe: http://www.indexjournal.com/news/JDLH-board-proposes-shift-to-governor-s-school-20193883
I hope that you will use it as background information and as a counterbalance to the disinformation you may hear that is being spread about the agency in efforts to close it down. I also hope you will visit the campus and see first-hand what it has to offer children and families and how it is an ideal resource for expanded agricultural education.
— Barbara Devinney, McCormick, S.C.
More support positive changes for nurse practitioners
Editor’s note: Here are some more letters sent in response to our May 3 story on an effort to allow more flexibility in how nurse practitioners provide health care.
To the editor:
I feel very strongly that we, as a state, are doing our population a significant disservice by limiting the ability of the nurse practitioners to utilize their licenses to the maximum. This is proven in many ways, but particularly by the limited availability of physicians’ practicing primary care in the rural areas of South Carolina.
Limiting the ability of the citizens of this state from having access to care when our physicians do not meet that need makes no sense — especially when you look at the quality of care provided by the nurse practitioner. Despite [the fact that] their education is less than that of the physician, it has been demonstrated repeatedly in surveys and in reviews that they provide excellent care.
Our quantity of education being less than that of the physician does not limit our ability to provide good healthcare to our patients. One of the first caveats that we, as nurse practitioners, are taught is to recognize what we do not know and seek that information so that we can deliver the best care possible for our patients.
The State of South Carolina should look at this issue without tinted glasses. What is more important here – quality health care for our citizens or the personal feeling of our physicians in this state. I personally believe that the citizens of South Carolina come first!
— Angie R. Cook, MSN, APRN, BC, FNP, West Columbia, S.C.
To the editor:
Re: S. 345
Even though the South Carolina Medical Association and its partners agree they have no evidence that nurse practitioners require supervision by them, they insist they need to be the ‘leaders’ of the team.
An M.D. degree does not make you a leader. It makes you a physician. Besides, with most M.D.s being employees of hospitals or health care systems, they are not even the boss of their own practices, let alone leaders. Although they deny it, this is all about turf and money.
— Randy Beckett, DNP, DC, NP-C, PMHNP-BC, FNP, Mount Pleasant, S.C.
- Have something to say? Send 200 words or less to email@example.com