psychonaut 6,793 Views
Joined: Dec 8, '06;
Posts: 339 (42% Liked)
; Likes: 343
Ha, ha. However I think some of my religious family have un-friended me on FB! They don't think I'm cool since I'm apparently headed straight to the fire pit after our most recent discussion!
It always amazes me how the people that post the most passionate know absolutely nothing about the subject that they post about.
Zenman - you rock! I've been here almost 12 years now and though I don't always agree with you - I find you a very interesting poster. I appreciate that have shared some of your life experiences with all of us - thanks.
Again, when the OP has been there and done that - well, then the credibility will be there.
For now, you have to take what they say with a grain of salt because it all seems to be a "he said, she said" kinda thing.
Amen to this thread. I ended up in some fortunate situations as a student, but there was some real stressful moments trying to get a site lined up. Our "Consensus Model" should include a little consensus on standardizing our educational system. I would probably have to re-think my position on the entry-to-practice issue if that level of education offered a single national curriculum and standards.
A most unfortunate antiphon. Underestimation of the impact of DNP colleagues to one's own detriment, and fractious emotionalism does far more damage than edicts from the AANP ever could. And there lies the threat; not from the organizations supporting the DNP, and certainly not from the existence of the DNP itself or individuals holding/seeking one.
More than anything else, understand what a differential diagnosis is. This was something that tripped up many of my colleagues, regardless of years of RN experience. This is a new skill set for RNs. Pathology, physical diagnosis, pharmacology...these are not conceptually different (just different in terms of breadth and depth at our new level). Learning to make a differential, then narrow it down based on history, signs and symptoms, labs, is a new thing. Having it clear at a conceptual level will serve you well in NP school.
I don't unequivocally support the DNP as entry degree, but I do think that all NPs should support the DNP as the terminal degree. We are the leaders and innovators of our profession.
We have worked hard to demonstrate our commitment, acumen and excellence. I think that we have earned your respect and support, even if you don't aspire to attain the DNP for yourself.
Rising tides raise all boats.
Agreed. Even if people cannot find common ground on the entry to practice issue (and I suspect it will be a moot point in the long run) I think threads such as this one, that demonstrate enmity for one's colleagues rather than obeisance and support, are infelicitous for the individuals involved as well as our shared profession. Would that people considered such before making derisive comments.
I just made the decision to renew my AANP membership. Part of it is the benefit angle, i.e. I can renew at student rate, discount on my cert (if I do AANP instead of/along with ANCC), etc. My hesitation was that my $$ goes to de-facto support of AANP's push for the DNP as entry to NP practice. However, I also think I may be able to stir up a 5th comumn within the org to oppose this, along with efforts at the State level. We'll see.
Legally, I don't know, but as a condition of employment? And working with the sure knowledge the "clinic" will NOT back you up if you deviate form said algorithm? I would definitely be wary.
I will say it again and again: in the end, it is the State Board of Nursing who will decide what degree is needed to be a NP in your state. That is where this battle can be fought (for those of us who oppose the DNP-as-NP-entry-to-practice) and won. This is where the assault on ADNs has been successfully resisted for many decades.
The DNP can absolutely exist as far as I am concerned, as a "terminal degree" for those grad-degree nurses who don't want to go the PhD route. There is absolutely NO rationale for the current iterations of the DNP to be the mandatory entry point to advance practice nursing. It should be an option, something to bolster an academic or administrative resume, NOT a de-facto requirement.
Beware the Consensus Model, and other nationally "recommended" alterations to State Nurse Practice Acts. Buried within are the assaults on the ADN RN and the MSN NP.
Check your state practice act first.
Tough call, and clearly a far cry from someone wanting narcotics. I like your invitation to provide you with some supportive evidence. This is the example of going out of your way for a colleague moreso than just giving it would be. Even a small study with shaky foundations would give you some theoretical basis to work from.
In those times when I've wanted to propose an unconventional dosing or whatever to a new provider, I always come prepared knowing I'm asking for an "off-label" use and having evidence and rationale to offer them (and not an attitude, like with the "MD" comment).
My very uneducated information is that providers in these clinics are limited to very strict treatment algorithms...am I misinformed?
The powers-to-be in academia are leaning heavily on the state BONs to secure DNP dominance and the destruction of the MSN-educated NP. The Consesus Model is an early move in this war. SInce the original backlash in nursing against the Mundinger point of view, they have gone stealth.
If you want to oppose this, it must be done at the state level. Involvement in state BONs is the only way to make sure you don't get railroaded. These are (in general) folks who likewise wish to eliminate the ADN as an entry-to-practice. Some good noise-making by our ADNs (and economic realities) has forstalled that from happening for four deades; similar action will be needed from MSNs who oppose the DNP as entry-to-practice for NPs.
That is a very good start, and to be emulated.
Advertise With Us