LPNs Fight Efforts To Phase Them Out - Page 13Register Today!
- May 8, '11 by CCRNDivaGM2RN, I'm not sure if it was your intention, but IMHO, the tone of your post was insulting and dismissive. One of my pet peeves about nursing is the divisive nature displayed among us.
I'm graduating from a RN-BSN completion program next week but it still bugs me when people insinuate that I was not a professional nurse prior to obtaining a BSN. Who precepts the new BSN grads or serves as their mentors? Many times it is a diploma or an ADN prepared RN. I was precepted by a diploma RN and I'm sure I still don't know what she knows.
During my completion program, I attended management class with nursing students who have never practiced nursing, yet they were receiving instruction on managing nursing staff. Yes, I do believe the content of some of these programs lead some BSN prepared nurses to display an aire of superiority. Some of our instructors even had a dismissive attitude towards us, as RN-BSN completion students.
My point is this: we, as nurses, outnumber those of any other health profession, yet we are the most disrespectful of one another. A MD may personally feel his education is superior to the that of the DO but you would never see them sponsor a study and report this in the media or to patients because they realize the strength they have as a whole is worth more than that. PharmDs and DPTs are not dismissing one another or disrespecting those who came before them (with lower levels of education). It is possible to support the advancement of nursing education without being disrespectful and dismissive towards our fellow nurses. We could accomplish so much if we were to embrace one another for our strengths and stand together as one.
- May 8, '11 by HazelLPN[QUOTE=GM2RN;5087623]I wish I had known that all RNs are crap before I studied so long for my BSN. I could have save myself a lot of time money and had a superior education to boot if I'd stopped at an LPN.[/QUOTE
Please provide more specific information about what part of the post that you quoted by Yours Truly stated or implied that "all RNs are crap" and I will gladly attempt to clear up any misunderstandings that you have.
Best to you,
- May 9, '11 by nursel56Quote from jahraThis. I guess for people who haven't lived through this evolution it's hard for them to fathom what we're talking about. To me one of the most discouraging aspects of it, is that the people who've created the division and taught their students to view any nurse without a BSN as inferior are the same people who propose the solution is for everything to follow their agenda aka "the single entry point" and accuse those who disagree with them of fomenting the divisions.With all due respect, RNs on our unit years ago worked side by side with LPNs. The difference was that as an RN we needed to cover certain tasks that the LPN was not allowed to do in the scope of their license.
The LPN was viewed as a peer, and was respected as such. The levels of education for RNs on the unit ranged from Diploma,ADN,BSN, and MSN.
Never did I hear a nurse showboat what level of education he or she had.
They gave input per patient to the team related to their experience
knowledge, and role.
It has only been recently that nursing itself has created a division in regard to nursing education.
Every goal stated by these people is laudable. I don't hear anyone here saying that furthering your education isn't necessary. Or even saying that in general, experience replaces formal education in any way. It's what they've had to do to the reputation of their sister (and brother) nurses along the way that I object to. Anyway, I can't really add anything to what you and HazelLPN have said, so I'll leave it be.
Quote from GM2RNThe thread isn't really even about LPN vs RN. It's about one group of LPNs at a hospital who've been handed their walking papers with virtually no notice, and drifted away from there.This thread is not about the different levels of RNs; it's about LPN vs RN. As for education, LPN does not equal RN, regardless of what LPNs would like to believe. I'm sorry, but I don't care how good an LPN's IV and foley skills are--techs can be better at those skills than some nurses--eight months of experience as an LPN does not equate to an RN.
It's just as wrong for people to make sweeping generalizations about RNs as it is for anything else, and I cringe when I read some of the common complaints about BSNs being clueless on the floor, etc
I've taken a great personal interest in the claims made by the BSN promoters and the tactics they use to advance their agenda. Do you think it would be a good idea to deny any student but a BSN student federal financial aid so those ADN and diploma programs will die on the vine? I see how they operate in the realm of policy-making and their media strategies. I've looked up the studies. I've looked up the studies their studies are based on. They've been successful with some of it, and not so much with others. I will guess, based on most of what I read here they are painting their student a far rosier scenario than is the case. Recently I read a recent grad saying "BSN in 10" is right around the corner, when in fact the only state that passed the law repealed it in 2003.
There are so many inconsistencies you hardly know where to start. For example, the most commonly offered reason for the superiority of the BSN is the addtional "theory" classes. It's the theory that sets you apart from your merely task-trained LPNs and ADNs. You revealed a little of that bias yourself by assuming the difference between a CNA and an LPN must be their ability to perform tasks like Foleys, and not what they think or assess.
As it happens in the real world a large chunk of the program is never used, or even reviled by working nurses. Shouldn't somebody be taking a look at that in terms of time and money wasted? That's what I think when I read post after post from students confused about "the client's impaired gas exchange or at risk for . . ." right next to one about the absolutely ridiculous NANDA diagnoses with lots of kudos!!
How is it that the ANA looks down on LPN and ADN education and think a very short second degree BSN program is just great?
Personally, I like certain theories and I love academics and a healthy to and fro about philosophies of nursing. I have the utmost respect for our nursing faculty here. I hope nobody ever takes critique as a disparaging comment. It's only a matter of how they're incorporated and interface with the real world.
Well, anyway. There's a lot there to talk about, so I'll end it here. My last point would be that what hiring decisions are made by hospitals can be explained by factors other than proven unsafe or incompetent care by LPNs, ADNs, and Diploma nurses.
- May 9, '11 by RhinoRocketRNfortunately I am from this area and can put forth some insight:
The LPNs at this facility have been in the process of being phased out for several years. It was and still is known that once an LPN leaves this facility, he or she will be replaced by a UAP, not an LPN. LPNs have not been hired at this facility for years now. Unfortunately as I am told this information was "leaked" before any details could be worked out.
So NO they were not just handed their pink slips one day and told they no longer work here. This has been a process for the past few years.
Do I think hospitals should phase out LPNs? No, however at this facility LPNs are not used the way they should be. Instead of phasing them out, this facility should restructure their scope of practice and allow for these LPNs to take patient teams and for all LPNs to pass medications... this is not the case.
- May 15, '11 by anniv91106Quote from GM2RNThis thread is not about the different levels of RNs; it's about LPN vs RN. As for education, LPN does not equal RN, regardless of what LPNs would like to believe. I'm sorry, but I don't care how good an LPN's IV and foley skills are--techs can be better at those skills than some nurses--eight months of experience as an LPN does not equate to an RN.
Many of the RNs posting in this thread have agreed that enough experience can overcome the education difference, but some of the LPNs posting have been blind to this and have posted negative comments about RNs. So I agree, there's a lack of respect.
There's also a lack of acknowledgement that not ALL LPNs are fantastic nurses and not ALL RNs are dimwits, but you'd never know it listening to some of the LPNs from this thread.
What LPNs are missing is that the RNs here are not making the decisions to phase out LPNs, but some are acting as though we are. That decision comes from higher up and we have no control over that. We are just stating the facts and our opinions as we see them.
What/who is the "higher up" that this is coming from? Shall we blame corporations, managers, joint commision, the unions??? Who's turn to play the bad guy so there's no accountability?
Getting rid of LPNs has not been able to be accomplished through legislation so now we are being led to turn on each other--if RNs refuse to supervise LPNs then those "in power" get what they want and the dirty work has been done by nurses themselves. No wonder nursing is in the condition it is!
What will you do when it comes time to take a stand for what is right where you work? Wake up nurses!
How can we get an update about the original article in this thread?
- Oct 20, '11 by frenchfroggyRNThe town I work in Does hire LPNs, in fact we have as many LPNs as RNs working. I am a RN BSN who was an LPN first. I do continue to work on the floor side by side with the LPNs wiping behinds, I do not feel that I am any better because of my degree. Yes, I have more education than the LPNs, but that was my choice, if they want to go back to school and get their RN they can and most of our LPNs are going to school. But we replace them with LPNs when they leave or put them to work as RNs on our floor/ER.
- Oct 21, '11 by tferdaiseI think what people are missing really is not the RN v LPN since the facilities usually follow state board rules. The real issue is making Nursing a real profession. Currently it still is looked at as a vocation and why is that? One of the main reasons is, there are too many entry points into nursing, LPN, ADN, Diploma, BSN. One paper I wrote in my BSN program was how to make nursing more of a professional Profession. How I did this was I did a compare and contrast paper between Engineers and Nursing. Basically before people start the flame, hear me out.
Engineering like nursing had many entry points into the field of engineering, some went to a 4 years school, some went to a trade school and some worked as an apprentice before being allowed to use the title Engineer. That all changed around 30 years ago when it became mandatory that only people who went received a 4 year degree from an accredited school could start the journey to be an engineer. Before this happened, Engineering was thought as a Vocations also. It's now a professional profession, and all of the infighting that nursing is going through happened in the Engineering world.
Am I saying that everybody who isn't a BSN prepared RN can not practice as a RN, NO that would be stupid and illogical. These people would be grandfathered into the profession just like they were with the Engineers. But there has to be a point in which the profession needs to do something to pull up its boot straps and take the plunge and say, starting in 2018 and after only people graduating from a BSN program can sit for the boards and have the title RN.
Does this sound harsh, no, but its what is needed to move the nursing profession to the next level. Everything is almost in place for this to happen, but the biggest hurdle is the amount of $$ community colleges have spent on ADN programs.
I was an LPN for 6 years before going back and getting my RN, BSN and now currently in MSN.
- Oct 23, '11 by ThePrincessBrideIf they want to avoid this mess, then they should advanced their education. This "bad-ass" rebel act is not going to get them anything but the boot. Besides, it would only take one more year of education...is it really worth all that ******** and complaining?
No. It isn't.
- Oct 23, '11 by nursel56Quote from ThePrincessBrideWhere do you see that anyone in this article refused to "advanced" their education? Badass? What a shame that someone with an attitude like that is planning to join our ranks. You certainly are judgemental for someone who isn't any kind of nurse yet. Whatever the merits of the issues themsellves, there is no place for disrespectful dialogue like that, and disappointing that anyone would "kudo" that.If they want to avoid this mess, then they should advanced their education. This "bad-ass" rebel act is not going to get them anything but the boot. Besides, it would only take one more year of education...is it really worth all that ******** and complaining?
No. It isn't.Last edit by nursel56 on Oct 23, '11
- Oct 23, '11 by DoGoodThenGoQuote from ThePrincessBrideJust so you know Licensed Practical Nursing is it's own distinct area of nursing with it's own scope of practice. It is *not* a shortened "RN" scheme though at some point most all states permitted ADN and BSN students to take the pratical nurse boards after only several semesters.If they want to avoid this mess, then they should advanced their education. This "bad-ass" rebel act is not going to get them anything but the boot. Besides, it would only take one more year of education...is it really worth all that ******** and complaining?
No. It isn't.
At the time LPN/LVN schools were founded the standard education for RN's in the United States was the traditional three year hospital program. The former continued with their (usually) one year program even after ADN/AAS (two year) degrees were founded and many diploma programs were shortened as well.
Furhtermore as for the "only one more year of education...." the same can be said of ADN/AAS nurses who did not or will not go for their BSN; afterall it is only two more years........
There are many areas of healthcare today for which LPNs/LVNs are well suited, problem is bean counters would rather pay for a souped up CNA or tech than a licensed nurse.