Mary Killeen, PhD, RN Testifies on Senate
Bills 792 and 793
Contact Person:
Mary B. Killeen, PhD, RN, CNAA
Testimony on Senate
Bills, No. 792 and 793
Tuesday February 12, 2002
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Higher Education
Good afternoon, my
name is Dr. Mary B. Killeen and I am an Associate Professor
of Nursing at the University of Michigan-Flint. I teach in the
undergraduate and graduate programs in the Department of Nursing.
I am very aware of
the nursing workforce’s current and looming shortage in
the state of Michigan and the nation. As an elected member of
the American Nurses Association’s Congress of Nursing Practice
and Economics, I am kept up to date on state and national initiatives
to address the core issue of the nursing shortage. I am pleased
that an effort is being made to address some of the underlying
barriers to recruitment of nurses in our state of Michigan.
The Senate Bills,
No. 792 and 793, are well intentioned on behalf of nurses and
the public. However, there are two major concerns with the proposed
legislation that are apparent to me.
First, Senate Bill
792 provides funding from the Tobacco Settlement Money for the
Michigan Nursing Scholarship Program. Michigan is one of the
worst states in the country for its record of using the Tobacco
Settlement Money for non-health related purposes. In good conscience,
I cannot recommend using this money for nursing scholarships,
as much I support incentives for students, as long as the Tobacco
Settlement Money is directed to non health purposes like MEAP
scholarships. The tobacco settlement money has the potential
to assist with scholarships for nursing education, but the money
should also be considered for other health issues such as tobacco
cessation programs. It would be easier to accept money for the
profession if the money was also being allocated to the patients
that we take care of, as was the intention of the settlement
money.
My second concern
is the payback method of this scholarship. Frankly, five years
as a full-time nurse in an approved setting is not an appealing
incentive. Scholarships traditionally do not need to be repaid
by service, especially five years of service. It is difficult
to imagine a nurse committing to such an extensive time frame.
A nurse may decide for multiple reasons to take a year off or
to work part-time instead of full-time. In both scenarios, the
nurse would be required to repay the scholarship.
The real need for
our students, minority and non-minority students, is for creative
financial aid packages that cover some living expenses. Students
too often are working long hours while trying to keep up with
school. Too often, due to the trying to keep up with living
expenses, their studies suffer and they are forced to take poor
grades or drop out. These bills would not reflect the needs
of students in our program at the University of Michigan-Flint.
I encourage the legislators
to continue to discuss the possibility of scholarships or to
help alleviate the nursing shortage, but I do not feel that
these bills are the right ones. A grant or stipend or scholarship
that does not require an extensive payback period would be a
great first step.
Thank you.
|
