Quote from traumaRUs
Actually, the DNP can be awarded to a CNS...my college of nursing is starting a DNP next year.
Yes ... but anyone who gets a DNP will have to spend the next 10 years explaining to people what the letters after her name means ... and may have to explain and defend that degree to people who assume that it is "not as good" as a "real" doctorate. Also, people without PhD's are limited in their abilitly to serve on dissertation committees for PhD students and sometimes to serve on faculties.
While the program may be every bit as rigorous and high quality as any, it will have to first demonstrate that quality before it will be given the same respect as the traditional degrees. That could take years .... and in a world in which several schools
are coming up with new degrees, it is confusing and may cause people to scoff at all the experimentation with new degrees and titles. Also, the competition to become the "standard" degree could be fierce. I wouldn't want to make that kind of committment to get a degree that might not survive the competitive market.
My point is that nursing needs to stop inventing all kinds of new degrees that cause confusion and dilute our message that we are as educated as any other profession ... and re-focus at strenghtening the programs that offer the standard degrees that are awarded by (and respected by) all the other disciplines.
If the profession feels it needs a doctoral level practice degree, it should use the one it already has (DNS) instead of making up new ones every couple of years. I understand why they don't -- it's because the DNS has become increasing like a PhD in it's research focus, blurring the line between the two. They should fix that problem and reach a consensus on the titling for 2 doctorates -- a research one (PhD) and a practice one (?). Then everyone should stick with just those 2 options and quit making up new ones that muddy the waters.