Do you think ADN programs will really be phased out?

At the risk of being flamed:cheeky:, I will respectfully direct you to do a search on this site. Upper right hand corner, big blue SEARCH button.

There are tons of current threads on the subject and you will find many discussions to read.

(By way of explanation, a recent poster called some of us rude for directing someone to do a search of the Forums.)

In the US, we take great pride (hubris?) in claiming to advocate "evidence-based" healthcare. Currently, we do have convincing evidence that BSN prepared nurses have a significantly positive impact on patient outcomes in ACUTE CARE. I haven't seen any corresponding evidence for non-acute care/services. So - IMO, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater...

1)we don't have enough BSN nurses to cover everything. I don't even think we have the capacity to produce sufficient numbers of BSN grads yet.

2) healthcare reimbursement continues to decline, which is putting pressure on providers to lower the overall labor costs. Not possible if we arbitrarily decide to require BSN entry into practice.

3) student loan debt - need I say more?

At the risk of being flamed:cheeky:, I will respectfully direct you to do a search on this site. Upper right hand corner, big blue SEARCH button.

There are tons of current threads on the subject and you will find many discussions to read.

(By way of explanation, a recent poster called some of us rude for directing someone to do a search of the Forums.)

No I don't fine this rude at all! Lol, I am glad you can direct me.

I have a copy of an OLD newpaper clipping hung on my office door. It states "Be a Nurse! Earn $30-$35 per week and study at home". This was in the 1920's. Nursing has changed since then, and continues to change, but I do not forsee a BSN requirement unless the government subsidies the education, as some countries do.

Actually in my area it's harder to get in an ADN program than a BSN program. Look at the people who are becoming nurses. People in their thirties, second career nurses. I don't see as many people who are just out of high school going into the traditional BSN programs. Many people get their ADN then go for the BSN, which is exactly what I plan on doing. I don't think you will see them going anywhere in the near future.

I don't understand why everyone assumes that if you obtained an ADN, it must have been thru a "community college or technical school." In my area there are plenty of 4 year universities that offer the ADN, and yes, of course, the classes are taught by doctorate prepared nurses. The ADN programs were originally designed to get the nurse into the workforce quicker, because there was a severe shortage of registered nurses. The classes are basically the same; the NCLEX is the same; and usually the pay is the same. When I first went to nursing school, I took an ADN program at a 4 year university, simply because I already had the core classes and needed to get out and work quick. The requirements for the ADN program I attended were much more stringent than the BSN. I had to have a higher ACT score, higher GPA, etc., just to be accepted. Many of the people who didn't make it in the ADN program went into the BSN program because the grade requirements were much more lax. It just gripes me that people don't realize that thru-out the United States, there are tons of 4 year universities that offer the ADN. Not everybody got theirs from a "community college or technical school." Some of the technical schools in my area offer the LPN, but not the RN. I don't know of any schools that offer ADN programs that have instructors with less than at least a master's degree, and most require a doctorate.

As a matter of fact, I first heard that "ADN programs will be phased out" way back in the mid 80's. I have been an RN for 25 years, and I have been hearing it that long. I think eventually the ADN will be revived because the predictions are that once we older nurses finally retire, there will be a shortage again. I rushed out and finished the BSN right after I got licensed because I thought the ADN would become obsolete; that was in 1994, 20 years ago! All the hospitals in my area hire ADN prepared nurses. The DON of my hospital has only an ADN.

I don't see them being phased out, although I DO perhaps foresee them being grandfathered in as RNs and the ADN programs morphing into LPN-type programs.

PS: I have been both an LPN and an ADN (actually AAS) RN.

I am really sorry that there are individuals who would like to become nurses, and don't have the money to attend nursing school, or have, "life issues", that make them unable to pursue a BSN.

The fact of the matter, is that nursing remains the least educated of heath care professionals, and who have the most influence on patient outcomes.

Other health care professions, seamlessly transitioned to higher entry level education levels, out earn nurses, command more respect than nurses, (spare me the' "nurses are once again voted the most trusted professionals, blah blah, blah). The public might believe that we are trustworthy, but in my 30+ years of nursing practice, they certainly do not respect us.

A splintered three way entry into practice does nothing but continue to splinter us as a profession. And that is exactly how the PTB want us.

I am sure that there are many individuals who would like to attend medical school, dental school, PT school, law school, but they cannot attend because they do not have the money, and for whatever reason do not qualify for school loans. Should these professional careers, lessen their requirements, or drop their tuition, to accommodate these students? Do you see them bending over backwards, to make it easier for them to attend medical school, law school, etc?

So why should nursing?

Many of these students manage to find a way to attend and graduate from these professional schools, with no excuses. So why shouldn't nurses?

JMHO and my NY $0.02

Lindarn, BSN, CCRN (ret)

Somewhere in the PACNW