Remember last month's cover photo on patient positioning? (Cover your eyes! Here it is.) We viewed the unstaged photo as a good example of patient positioning that requires proper technique to avoid patient injury. But it touched off a firestorm of criticism. Some of you found it "offensive," "inappropriate" and "unnecessary." One even called it "pornographic."

"Three men positioning a women in a compromising position — no woman wants to imagine that prior to having surgery," writes Stephanie Deeb RN, recovery room manager at the Pediatric Surgery Center in Odessa, Fla., in an e-mail.

Annette Ellis, RN, of TriHealth Evendale Hospital West in Cincinnati, Ohio, writes: "As a pre-op/post-op nurse, I have no doubt that positioning for surgery is vitally important. That being said, did you have to show a naked female being positioned for surgery on the cover of your magazine? Where is the dignity for this patient ? Her exposed body is visible for all to see, save for a clamp at her genitalia and a Foley taped on her leg."

Here at the magazine we treasure all feedback, good and bad, and honestly, criticism frequently helps us more than praise. But this caught us by surprise. All that said, we found it striking that not one person challenged the authenticity of the photo. Anyone who's been around surgery knows that patients are very frequently left much more exposed than the patient on our cover was.

"I felt that the patient was covered appropriately — probably more than she would have been if there was not a picture being taken," says Mary C. Wilson, BSN, RN, CNOR, of West Virginia University Hospitals in Morgantown, W.Va.

Well, here's a thought. If we think patients would be uncomfortable with how we treat them when they are anesthetized, then is there something wrong with how we're treating patients?

Our current protocol seems to be "what they don't know won't hurt them." But is that really fair? Do patients not deserve to know what's going to happen with their bodies — including the circumstances under which private areas may be seen by surgical (and other) personnel?

And when a procedure really doesn't require or is unlikely to require exposure, then should surgical facilities still force patients to remove their underwear on the off-chance that access to the area might be needed? (Here's one discussion on that: tinyurl.com/5t4n5of.) What about issuing patients a pair of disposable underwear just for surgery — helpful for their modesty, but removable in case they need to be cut off for something like a Foley insertion. We'd love to hear your thoughts.

This isn't the first time readers have objected to one of our cover photos that was a little too real or revealing. And it sure won't be the last. But instead of criticizing us for showing things as they are, perhaps it's better to figure out a way to protect the dignity and privacy of your patients.