Today I was filling out a survey. Under the occupation section I immediately scanned for "professional"
Boy was I startled to see these first 2 options:
•professional (eg doctor, accountant)
•semi-professional (eg nurse, technician)
ummm what?!?! 😡😡😡 so frustrating to not be viewed as a professional when I have a bachelors degree, a speciality certificate, and 7 years experience not to mention a specialised knowledge and skill set for my PROFESSION of nursing!
Specializes in Case mgmt., rehab, (CRRN), LTC & psych.
Hairstylists nail technicians and (private) long-distance truck drivers also aren't usually time clockers and build their business based on reputation.... So does that mean that they are professionals and we aren't O_O[/quote']All of the aforementioned occupations, including nursing, can be entered without any college education whatsoever.
I still think nursing is an emerging profession rather than a true profession. However, we can agree to disagree. :)
To be honest, whether people think of me as a professional, semi-professional, blue-collar worker, or whatever, isn't really very important to me on a personal level. In terms of status and income potential, whether or not we are regarded as professionals is of more importance, but I didn't come into nursing expecting to be in a prestigious and very well paid profession. Nursing is a vitally important profession, and nurses are generally well respected by the public, which, in my opinion, counts for a lot. I am pleased with the effort I have put into my practice, and I make a continual effort to improve my practice, and I know that I have been able to make a positive difference, so being a nurse has been very meaningful for me and continues to be.
Here's a quick and dirty way to determine if something is a profession or not:
Could a reasonably intelligent person with proficient high-school math and literacy skills be trained to do your job in 3 - 4 weeks? Not do it as well as you can -- that is not as efficiently, safely, or in as skilled a manner as you -- but could they be trained to perform the required tasks to a level where the general objectives of the work would be met?
If judged this way, is nursing as defined by the generalist med-surg floor nurse a profession? No. You could train someone to pass meds, hang IVs, draw blood, change dressings, provide personal care, and conduct assessments in 3 - 4 weeks. They wouldn't do it quickly and they wouldn't do it well, and they would probably only have the faintest idea as to why they were doing any of it, but they would be able to do it.
Compare that with a lawyer. Could you train someone to litigate in 3 - 4 weeks? Of course not. What about an civil engineer -- could you train someone to design a highway overpass in 3 - 4 weeks? How about a CPA -- could you train someone to draw up complex estates, or provide advice to a corporation on the best strategy for upgrading their equipment while maximizing depreciation -- in 3 - 4 weeks? Or a computer programmer -- could you, in 3 - 4 weeks, teach someone with only basic computer skills to design and create a spreadsheet program like Excel?
The major difference between these professions and generalist nursing is that, unlike nursing, someone with 3 - 4 weeks of training in these fields would be essentially just as useless as someone with no training at all. It wouldn't just be a matter of them doing the work poorly, or slowly, or unsafely -- someone with only a high school education and no other training would be completely unequipped to draw up blueprints for an apartment complex after a 3 - 4 week crash course in architecture. Compare that to basic floor nursing. Ask yourself, honestly, if someone couldn't be trained in a month to complete the bare minimum tasks to get through a shift as a floor nurse. Not all the stuff that we should be doing, and pride ourselves on doing -- patient education, providing a last line of defense against medical errors -- that really do require professional education; just the basic skills and abilities without which the floor would cease to function.
Here's a quick and dirty way to determine if something is a profession or not:
Could a reasonably intelligent person with proficient high-school math and literacy skills be trained to do your job in 3 - 4 weeks? Not do it as well as you can -- that is not as efficiently, safely, or in as skilled a manner as you -- but could they be trained to perform the required tasks to a level where the general objectives of the work would be met?
If judged this way, is nursing as defined by the generalist med-surg floor nurse a profession? No. You could train someone to pass meds, hang IVs, draw blood, change dressings, provide personal care, and conduct assessments in 3 - 4 weeks. They wouldn't do it quickly and they wouldn't do it well, and they would probably only have the faintest idea as to why they were doing any of it, but they would be able to do it.
Compare that with a lawyer. Could you train someone to litigate in 3 - 4 weeks? Of course not. What about an civil engineer -- could you train someone to design a highway overpass in 3 - 4 weeks? How about a CPA -- could you train someone to draw up complex estates, or provide advice to a corporation on the best strategy for upgrading their equipment while maximizing depreciation -- in 3 - 4 weeks? Or a computer programmer -- could you, in 3 - 4 weeks, teach someone with only basic computer skills to design and create a spreadsheet program like Excel?
The major difference between these professions and generalist nursing is that, unlike nursing, someone with 3 - 4 weeks of training in these fields would be essentially just as useless as someone with no training at all. It wouldn't just be a matter of them doing the work poorly, or slowly, or unsafely -- someone with only a high school education and no other training would be completely unequipped to draw up blueprints for an apartment complex after a 3 - 4 week crash course in architecture. Compare that to basic floor nursing. Ask yourself, honestly, if someone couldn't be trained in a month to complete the bare minimum tasks to get through a shift as a floor nurse. Not all the stuff that we should be doing, and pride ourselves on doing -- patient education, providing a last line of defense against medical errors -- that really do require professional education; just the basic skills and abilities without which the floor would cease to function.
Would the floor not fall apart rather quickly with task trained only staff without the education and experience to observe changes in condition and take appropriate action? Assessment, judgement and decision making are not constant basic essential skills needed on the floor?
Here's a quick and dirty way to determine if something is a profession or not:
Could a reasonably intelligent person with proficient high-school math and literacy skills be trained to do your job in 3 - 4 weeks? Not do it as well as you can -- that is not as efficiently, safely, or in as skilled a manner as you -- but could they be trained to perform the required tasks to a level where the general objectives of the work would be met?
If judged this way, is nursing as defined by the generalist med-surg floor nurse a profession? No. You could train someone to pass meds, hang IVs, draw blood, change dressings, provide personal care, and conduct assessments in 3 - 4 weeks. They wouldn't do it quickly and they wouldn't do it well, and they would probably only have the faintest idea as to why they were doing any of it, but they would be able to do it.
Compare that with a lawyer. Could you train someone to litigate in 3 - 4 weeks? Of course not. What about an civil engineer -- could you train someone to design a highway overpass in 3 - 4 weeks? How about a CPA -- could you train someone to draw up complex estates, or provide advice to a corporation on the best strategy for upgrading their equipment while maximizing depreciation -- in 3 - 4 weeks? Or a computer programmer -- could you, in 3 - 4 weeks, teach someone with only basic computer skills to design and create a spreadsheet program like Excel?
The major difference between these professions and generalist nursing is that, unlike nursing, someone with 3 - 4 weeks of training in these fields would be essentially just as useless as someone with no training at all. It wouldn't just be a matter of them doing the work poorly, or slowly, or unsafely -- someone with only a high school education and no other training would be completely unequipped to draw up blueprints for an apartment complex after a 3 - 4 week crash course in architecture. Compare that to basic floor nursing. Ask yourself, honestly, if someone couldn't be trained in a month to complete the bare minimum tasks to get through a shift as a floor nurse. Not all the stuff that we should be doing, and pride ourselves on doing -- patient education, providing a last line of defense against medical errors -- that really do require professional education; just the basic skills and abilities without which the floor would cease to function.
If I am understanding correctly, you are currently in a direct entry NP program. Respectfully, without having trained as a nurse and having worked as a bedside nurse, you really are not in a position to evaluate what the responsibilities of a bedside nurse entail. No, an untrained person could not be trained in a few weeks to safely complete the bare minimum tasks to get through a shift as a floor nurse, and nursing involves a lot more than just completing tasks. Is your training teaching you this?
When we as a group cannot even come to an agreement on the minimum education needed for entry to practice, we can only dream of being taken seriously as a 'profession'.
Same thing for lawyers, some states don't even require college degree to sit for the bar......
Specializes in Case mgmt., rehab, (CRRN), LTC & psych.
Would the floor not fall apart rather quickly with task trained only staff without the education and experience to observe changes in condition and take appropriate action? Assessment, judgement and decision making are not constant basic essential skills needed on the floor?
Unlicensed people have been slowly taking over licensed nursing tasks for some time already. These people might have full awareness as to what the Amiodarone is for, or the importance of sterile technique during a Foley catheter insertion. However, unlicensed workers have been performing tasks that were once within the strict realm of the licensed nurse.
The vast majority of skilled nursing facilities and assisted living facilities in my area utilize medication aides to administer drugs, including high-risk ones such as Coumadin and Digoxin. In the state where I reside, medication aides are CNAs with a few extra weeks of training. Due to the sheer volume of patients, a head-to-toe assessment is done once weekly.
Some hospitals in my area utilize unlicensed patient care assistants (PCAs) to scan bladders, insert Foley catheters, start IVs, apply CPM machines, insert and remove rectal tubes, administer enteral tube feedings, apply heat and cold, and perform other tasks that only licensed nurses were allowed to do in previous times.
Again, I'll reiterate that these medication aides and PCAs lack the educational preparation to fully understand the implications of what they're doing. However, utilization of these workers does somewhat bolster ISingTheBodyElectric's assertion that a reasonably intelligent person could perform many licensed nursing tasks with only a few weeks of training.
As a postscript, I was a 19-year-old unlicensed direct care worker at a group home for intellectually disabled adults. In addition to the ADLs and cleaning, I also administered drugs such as Haldol and Zyprexa. I didn't know why I was giving these medications, but I was giving them.
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
I have always considered bedside RNs to be a skilled trade, or highly skilled blue collar worker. Sometimes I feel differently, but then it comes time to punch the time clock and...............
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
When we as a group cannot even come to an agreement on the minimum education needed for entry to practice, we can only dream of being taken seriously as a 'profession'.
I very much disagree. There are other professions that also have multiple paths to entry and are still considered full professionals.
Physicians among them. I don't think there is anyone who doesn't consider physicians to be professionals and yet one can enter the practice with two different levels of degrees (bachelors and doctorate) and there are two different kinds of doctorate medical degrees. School length varies from 5 total years of post secondary education to 8 or more.
Attorneys are the same. There is a variety of paths to a law license and some states don't even require a college degree.
I think that having multiple entry paths is NOT one of the barriers to professional status for nurses.
If we are "semi -professional" then it means that we are half -baked! Meaning we are inferior to those who you consider to be professionals.heath is centralized to everyone such that for one to be a professor he/she must have a good health status! So if you consider nursing as a profession let it be an absolute profession.nurses are well recognized for their work they do
Titrating pressors is pretty basic math. Not exactly rocket science. An no, those are not fully descriptive of a nurse's responsibilities, but they are a very substantial part of them.
Not rocket science, but definitely beyond basic math.
Titrating pressors based upon the protocol may be "basic math," but the pre-, intra-, and post-assessments are not. There is more to titrating a drip than simply using an algebraic formula.
TheCommuter, BSN, RN
102 Articles; 27,612 Posts