Nursing is like the military...rank has meaning - page 2
As I read the various posts- the same theme seems to keep popping up over and over again... BScN vs. ADN vs. LPN etc etc.... Lets all face it- education does matter- title means something... it... Read More
May 30, '01Who cares how much education someone has?
Does it matter to you if your DOCTOR decided to become a SURGEON ...... but as long as he was "competent..and lets face it there IS a shortage of doctors".....get real.
I care, who is doing what, with what kind of education and how they are doing it.
It may bug you.....or others........but that is reality folks. Deal with it. A cna is NOT a RN. Bottom line. There is a world of difference and people who don't know or don't care to face it are living in a dream world. JMP
May 30, '01Hi. This is how I see it. I think it is important to have order to reduce chaos. But, as typical for nursing, that is not the case. CNAs, LPNs, APNs, all take exams or boards unique to their education and training. Their state practice acts to my knowledge are pretty specific as to the do's and don'ts pertaining to their title. All RNs, at this point, fall into the same pile. Therefore, I can see how employers or the military justify having an RN with an ADN over a nurse with a BSN. I also see why RNs debate about whose better. I had mentioned on another post about the improbability that state governments would be able to fund separate boards for each type of RN.
The question for me is, should there be rank order in the civilian world for education, pay as well as title? Or, do we need to continue to debate about the merit of having the varied nursing titles with overlapping job descriptions and worker abilities? It wouldn't surprise me to learn that overlapping of duties and education is one of the reasons that condensing nursing titles and education was discussed in the first place.
May 30, '01Originally posted by Mijourney:
<STRONG>I also see why RNs debate about whose better. </STRONG>
I think RNs who posses a degree simply want to be recognized as different, because, yes, they are more educated. They certainly don't get recognized by employers as there is no difference in pay. So..my question is, what is the incentive? If all RNs are the same, despite educational background, then why have an ADN, BSN, MSN or PhD track at all? Why not just bring back the diploma programs?
(and I say "bring back" because in my state the diploma programs have been eliminated)
May 31, '01Hi Suzy. Like you, I have a BSN. I'm also a. Yes, I'm frustrated about the lack of recognition for my additional education. I've vented this on this bb. When I first came to this bb over one year ago, I even heavily engaged in a debate about the merit of BSN as entry level. However, I've had to pull back a little.
I believe I can assume that at this point, you're a career-oriented nurse. That's great, and that's what nursing needs most I feel. Most nurses, in my view, are not career-oriented if you look at the level of proactivity within our profession for our profession. My statement that you quoted is based on my own experiences as a long time nurse. It could have easily referred to "experience" and/or "education."
Don't lose my point that the other nursing professionals and paraprofessionals have their own unique set of certification or licensing exams and practice acts. Even though there may be some overlap, it's easy to distinguish CNAs, LPNs, APNs among nursing staff and the AHA although the public and other health professionals tend to lump all of us together. In my neck of the woods, it's easy to call an RN and RN because everything IS essentially based on experience alone. What do you suggest can be done to clearly distinguish each type of RN so that those of us who choose to advance our education to the BSN level can get more than a congratulations? My employer feels that tuition reimbursement is adequate for those who go back to school-especially if you're working the same job. What are your thoughts on this?