Can Someone Be a Nurse Without Jean Watson?? - page 8

Ok now, as I delve back INTO nursing philosophy and theories, I come across, again, the theories of Jean Watson that have been hailed as the greatest thing since polyurethane IV bags - The Caring... Read More

  1. by   live4today
    Originally posted by Susy K


    It wasn't really a competition, Renee. It was just a discussion about the usefulness of Watson's theory, and perhaps about having any theory of nursing at all, and about the reasoning behind nursing theories. I was only using your comment about nursing being compared to motherhood as evidence that perhaps nursing shouldn't try so hard to separate itself. That's all.
    Susy.......I can clearly "feel" your passion regarding Theory in Nursing......I....on the other hand....have never been into theory or theorist......too much like working with hypothetical drama.....much like untested and unproven psychology.......which totally bores me. :zzzzz Therefore......I will leave this area of passion to those of you who are passionate about it. Like "JennyP" stated......only in my own words here........I am soooooo glad that my "braincells" were never wasted on THEORY OR THEORISTS :zzzzz

    Carry on PASSIONATE ONE! :kiss
  2. by   Q.
    It's really not a "passion" Renee but simply a byproduct of going to school!! I am forced to take Nursing Theory and Nursing Philosophy; am forced to write a paper on what I define my philosophy is; am forced to determine the philosophical roots of a nursing theory, whether it's Decartes, Aristotle or Kant. If I were not enrolled in school, this thread would never have been started.

    I use these BBs here simply as sounding boards so I can better prepare for class. It's not really any deeper than that!
  3. by   llg
    I am new to this list and want to begin by saying, "Thank you" to all who have contributed to this thread. I have found it very interesting. It is particularly relevent to one of my current projects at work. I work in the staff development department of a hospital and my colleagues and I am currently discussing the role of theory in nursing and how we can better use it in our clinical and education practice. I also happen to have gotten my PhD at the Univ. of Colorado Health Sciences Center, where, yes, I did know Jean Watson and took a class from her.

    While part of me wants to write pages and pages in response to your posts, I'm too practical for that. So, I thought I would just share the preliminary thoughts of my colleagues here as we struggle with the whole question of the role of theory in practice.

    (1) We have come to believe that theory can help the novice nurse organize her assessments, documentation, thoughts, etc. by providing a structure (or framework or scaffolding) to help that novice manage all the information and all the different aspects of a situation. As nurses get more experienced, they seem to need that formal structure less and less. This might explain why a lot of very experienced nurses hate to get "bogged down" with theoretical discussions. (This view, by the way, would be consistent with The Dreyfus Model of Skill Acquistion -- which forms the basis for some of Patricia Benner's nursing theory work.)

    (2) Nursing theories, like the theories in any other field, are the creations of human beings -- and therefore, they are flawed. The history of any field (nursing, medicine, astrophysics, geology, etc.) is the story of one generation modifiying the theories of the previous generations. That's what science is all about -- one person proposing a possible explanation for something (hyposthesis), followed by debate and testing, followed by new hypotheses.

    It is very, very possible to find "pearls of wisdom" or "kernals of truth" (or whatever you want to call them) embedded in a theory even though you don't agree with everything in that theory. It is very possible, even probable, that one part of a theorists work might be weak while another part may be strong and useful. It's not an "all or nothing" deal.

    (4) It's important to distinguish between philosophical theories and scientific theories. A lot of the work of nursing theorists is really philosphical, not scientific. Philosophy and science are 2 totally different fields of endeavor. Therefore, it is inappropriate to evaluate philosophy using scientific criteria.

    While I agree with much of Jeff R.'s essay, I take a kinder view of the situation and the theorists because I read their work as philosophy, not science. Also, I view the work of the major nursing theorists within the context of the history and philosophy of the academic discipline of nursing. I can relate to the difficulties these women have overcome to accomplish what they have and value what they have to contribute. Again, I am not saying that I agree with all of it, only that I take a kinder view of it. I see value in much of it, even though I acknowledge that much of it is flawed.

    One controversial point in his essay that I agree with: Most nursing programs are not nearly rigorous enough academically. Throughout history, there has been an "anti-intellectualism" in nursing that has always kept us down. If we want to be accepted as equals to the other professions, we must raise our standards.

    llg
  4. by   live4today
    Originally posted by Susy K
    It's really not a "passion" Renee but simply a byproduct of going to school!! I am forced to take Nursing Theory and Nursing Philosophy; am forced to write a paper on what I define my philosophy is; am forced to determine the philosophical roots of a nursing theory, whether it's Decartes, Aristotle or Kant. If I were not enrolled in school, this thread would never have been started.

    I use these BBs here simply as sounding boards so I can better prepare for class. It's not really any deeper than that!
    That's good to know. I wish you well in your program at school. I'm sure you'll do your best! However.....it would be nicer to hear you say that you are loving what you do since it makes a much better impact on the student nurses here to read that nurses pursue higher education in nursing because they are PASSIONATE about doing so rather than because they feel they HAVE to do so.....whether they want to or not.....and then feel "forced to do so".....don't you think, Susy k?
  5. by   Q.
    Originally posted by cheerfuldoer
    However.....it would be nicer to hear you say that you are loving what you do since it makes a much better impact on the student nurses here to read that nurses pursue higher education in nursing because they are PASSIONATE about doing so rather than because they feel they HAVE to do so.....whether they want to or not.....and then feel "forced to do so".....don't you think, Susy k?
    No, not really. The hard and fast truth is that I am going to school because the jobs I want as a nurse require a MSN. It's really that simple. Nursing students can learn from me saying this because that is the reality out there in the profession, and in ANY profession. If we want to get ahead, we need to raise the bar, both personally and as a profession.

    As far as forced, I only meant that back to you in reference to my being "passionate" about nursing theory and theorists. During summer and during all the year prior to starting grad school, Jean Watson never crossed my mind. The only reason she is on my mind is simply due to classroom content.
  6. by   Q.
    Originally posted by llg
    I am new to this list and want to begin by saying, "Thank you" to all who have contributed to this thread. I have found it very interesting.
    Welcome llg, and thank you for participating. Also, thank you for the citations on Swanson.

    We have come to believe that theory can help the novice nurse organize her assessments, documentation, thoughts, etc. by providing a structure (or framework or scaffolding) to help that novice manage all the information and all the different aspects of a situation.


    I agree! Excellent point.

    It's important to distinguish between philosophical theories and scientific theories. A lot of the work of nursing theorists is really philosphical, not scientific. Philosophy and science are 2 totally different fields of endeavor. Therefore, it is inappropriate to evaluate philosophy using scientific criteria.


    Perhaps in the truest sense of the word you are correct, except that nursing I think, in particular Watson and Rogers, try to "scientify" (I know, not a word) their philosophical base theories, perhaps partially to gain acceptance in the academic community and perhaps partially to gain respect in the scientific community. In either case, I feel it makes us look bad.


    One controversial point in his essay that I agree with: Most nursing programs are not nearly rigorous enough academically. Throughout history, there has been an "anti-intellectualism" in nursing that has always kept us down. If we want to be accepted as equals to the other professions, we must raise our standards.


    Most definitely!
  7. by   semstr
    My post is gone! OMG, I typed and typed and it just didn't work! FRUST.
    So short version now.
    Linda, no sweat, I know what you mean,, especially the part with tylenol and coffee.
    I am having a hard time to make it interesting for my students, a bit easier for me is the fact that I teach history too, so I can explain the thoughts and doings of these "old" (I know, not allof them) ladies a bit better, comparing their theories with the time they lived in.

    Susy, question: do you learn something about the European theories too? like Juchli, Krohwinkel and Kppeli?
    Are you into the nursing-phenomenens and stuff like that?
    Take care, Renee
  8. by   live4today
    Susy........we are both right in our own world of thinking. You think one way......I think in a totally different way.......this is good......so.......as I stated before.......good luck in your endeavors to arrive at whatever goals you strive for in your life. :kiss
  9. by   llg
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Susy K
    [B]
    Perhaps in the truest sense of the word you are correct, except that nursing I think, in particular Watson and Rogers, try to "scientify" (I know, not a word) their philosophical base theories, perhaps partially to gain acceptance in the academic community and perhaps partially to gain respect in the scientific community. In either case, I feel it makes us look bad.

    I agree completely. Because so many people think that the scientific method is the best and only legitimate way of developing knowledge, it is tempting to "scientify" any point you wish to make. I think we would be better off to acknowledge that other ways of knowing are legitimate and then not try to fit square pegs into round holes.

    llg
  10. by   Q.
    But isn't it hard to gain respect from the scientific community by NOT being scientific?
  11. by   llg
    Yes. The scientific community can be very closed-minded about anything that does not fit the scientific paradigm. However, that doesn't mean that we should limit ourselves to the practice of science only. We should continue to engage in scientific research -- but also look beyond science to further our understanding.

    By the way ... philosophy, mathematics, history, and art are all considered by many scholars to be outside the scientific realm. And yet, few question whether they are legitimate fields of inquiry -- or suggest that their methods are bogus because they are not based on the scientific method. If we truly believe that nursing is both an art and a science, then we should not limit ourselves to only the study of science. And we should not be embarrassed about that or be afraid to label our work as something other than science.

    llg (who has to go home now and will get back on the computer tomorrow)
  12. by   donmurray
    I should first confess to never having heard of any of these theorists in 30 years of nursing, apart from Virginia Henderson, and Peplau. The debate is fascinating. I posted this in another thread, but it seems appropriate right here, for the sting in the tail;

    " I firmly believe that if Registration (of nurses) were to pass, it would lead nurses to consider themselves belonging to what is called a "Profession." The tendency would be to think themselves more the colleagues of Doctors, instead of simply carriers-out of the orders of Doctors.
    In fact they would be a sort of pseudo-scientific person"

    The Chairman of The London Hospital, Sydney Holland, in evidence to a Parliamentary Committee on nurse registration in 1904!
    Things may not have changed so much as we think.
  13. by   live4today
    Don......nurses here in America ARE Registered Nurses?

    Or, do you mean becoming REGISTERED in some other way????

    Also......I...PERSONALLY SPEAKING...have ALWAYS thought of myself as a "Profession Registered Nurse" AND a "colleague of doctors".....and nothing LESS!!! :kiss

close