Doctoral degree to become an NP???

bayouchick02 · Jan 21, 2008

So, is this actually going to take effect by 2015 then b/c i have one of the educators at my hospital say that her sister who is an NP had to go back to school of her doctorate. I asked her if all that was really true, and she said there is no grandfather clause here. ALL NP's had to go and earn their doctorate. I sure hope this is not true b/c if that were the case, then the WOULD have to make ALL entry-level nursing positions require a BSN. We all know that's not gonna happen anytime soon!!

Editorial Team / Admin · Jan 21, 2008

So, is this actually going to take effect by 2015 then b/c i have one of the educators at my hospital say that her sister who is an NP had to go back to school of her doctorate. I asked her if all that was really true, and she said there is no grandfather clause here. ALL NP's had to go and earn their doctorate. I sure hope this is not true b/c if that were the case, then the WOULD have to make ALL entry-level nursing positions require a BSN. We all know that's not gonna happen anytime soon!!

No, this is not true. A required DNP will not disenfranchise any NP already in practice.

Does implementation of the DNP mean advanced practice nurses will no longer be permitted to practice without a doctorate?
No, nurses with master's degrees will continue to practice in their current capacities. Recommendations will be forthcoming from the Roadmap Task Force on how to facilitate rapid transition to the DNP for master's-level nurses seeking this credential.

http://www.aacn.nche.edu/DNP/dnpfaq.htm

core0 · Jan 21, 2008

So, is this actually going to take effect by 2015 then b/c i have one of the educators at my hospital say that her sister who is an NP had to go back to school of her doctorate. I asked her if all that was really true, and she said there is no grandfather clause here. ALL NP's had to go and earn their doctorate. I sure hope this is not true b/c if that were the case, then the WOULD have to make ALL entry-level nursing positions require a BSN. We all know that's not gonna happen anytime soon!!

Where is here? As far as I know there are no current requirements to have a DNP to practice. Realistically there are three groups that can mandate the doctorate:

1. The various certifying agencies for certification

2. The state BONs for licensure

3. Medicare/Insurance companies for billing

Of those only the state BONs have even looked at this as far as I know. Medicare and the certifying agencies are silent so far. The factor that mandated the Masters in nursing was Medicare if I remember correctly. The state and certification requirements followed that. The presumption is that those working as NPs will continue to work as NPs and any new requirements would apply to those entering the field.

David Carpenter, PA-C

shannonFNP, BSN, MSN, RN · Jan 26, 2008

I don't understand the reasoning! Are PA's having to get a doctorate too? :banghead:

core0 · Jan 26, 2008

I don't understand the reasoning! Are PA's having to get a doctorate too?

Nope, our educational process tends to work a bit differently. We do have to have Master's to practice in three states if that helps.

David Carpenter, PA-C

bumchick · Jan 28, 2008

I am currently in a masters NP program and there is thought that all current NP's would be grandfathered into this new DNS degree. Only 3-4 % of all nurses have an NP degree. We can not decide that the BSN is entry level for nursing and now we are going to decide that all NP's are going to need a DNS? Makes me crazy.

Later

Mary

MSmagnolia · Jan 29, 2008

After readng many posts either for or against... I am a C- FNP/ANP and I will be pursing a DNP in Fall of 08... Alot of thought went into do I want this? but- as many point out.. alot of schools are heading that way and weeding out MSN porgrams. No, I do not need this and no I probably won't get a huge pay jump. But I work for the gov't and luckily I 'll be able to do most of my clinical here with tremendous papers... LOL... I hate the papers!!! ... but, we are all Nurses as I tell my patients daily and we as NP's love to teach and prevent problems so hence I will prevent being told to get my DNP .. I'll already have it..

PS- I still have about 25 years left in this role ... if I didn't I might not feel the same... :bugeyes:

prairienp · Jan 29, 2008

I am currently in a masters NP program and there is thought that all current NP's would be grandfathered into this new DNS degree. Only 3-4 % of all nurses have an NP degree. We can not decide that the BSN is entry level for nursing and now we are going to decide that all NP's are going to need a DNS? Makes me crazy.
Later
Mary

The DNS is an academic degree equal to the PhD. The DNP is a clinical degree and not considered equal to the DNS, DNSc, or PhD.

elkpark · Jan 29, 2008

The DNS is an academic degree equal to the PhD. The DNP is a clinical degree and not considered equal to the DNS, DNSc, or PhD.

The DNS, DNSc, ND, etc., etc., etc., are not equal to a PhD -- if they were, there would be no need for them to be called something different. These are all "clinical doctorates," which have been around for a long time in nursing. The only difference in the new DNP degrees is that the focus/concentration would be on entry-level advanced practice preparation. The standards that the university has to meet to offer these degrees and that the student has to meet to earn these degrees are significantly less rigorous and demanding than for the PhD, which is why so many schools offer them instead of the PhD (I have a number of nursing academia mentors who refer to these other degrees as the "quick 'n dirty" doctorates).

Actually, the DNP is the academic equal of (all) the other "quick 'n dirty" doctorates, and part of this whole discussion (moving APN education to the doctoral level) is the proposal to do away with the multitude of "other" doctorate names (which are a problem already, because no one really knows what any of them signify, particularly outside of nursing!), rename them all "DNP"s, and have only DNP and PhD degrees at the doctoral level in nursing (which makes a lot of sense, and would parallel doctoral level education in the other human service/healthcare-related fields like social work and psychology).

prairienp · Jan 30, 2008

The DNS, DNSc, ND, etc., etc., etc., are not equal to a PhD -- if they were, there would be no need for them to be called something different. These are all "clinical doctorates," which have been around for a long time in nursing. The only difference in the new DNP degrees is that the focus/concentration would be on entry-level advanced practice preparation. The standards that the university has to meet to offer these degrees and that the student has to meet to earn these degrees are significantly less rigorous and demanding than for the PhD, which is why so many schools offer them instead of the PhD (I have a number of nursing academia mentors who refer to these other degrees as the "quick 'n dirty" doctorates).
Actually, the DNP is the academic equal of (all) the other "quick 'n dirty" doctorates, and part of this whole discussion (moving APN education to the doctoral level) is the proposal to do away with the multitude of "other" doctorate names (which are a problem already, because no one really knows what any of them signify, particularly outside of nursing!), rename them all "DNP"s, and have only DNP and PhD degrees at the doctoral level in nursing (which makes a lot of sense, and would parallel doctoral level education in the other human service/healthcare-related fields like social work and psychology).

I agree the ND is not equal to the PhD. The DNSc and DNS are considered equal, in fact the course work is often the same. Often the DNSc and DNS do have a clinical focus for their disquistions. Academia considers the DNSc equal to the PhD for tenure at every university I am aware of . Are you aware of any university that won't consider the DNSc for a tenure position? I would be interested in knowing what you feel the difference is between the DNSc and the PhD in nursing.

Calling the DNSc and DNS "quick and dirty" is inapprporiate, some of the best NP leaders we have are DNSc prepared. I am sure they wouldn't consider the educational process as "quick and dirty"

markdanurse · Jan 31, 2008

I agree that a 4 year Doctorate of Nursing anything should not be considered a "quick'n'dirty" doctoral degree. But a DNSc, DNP, ND, DNS, etc. is not anything close to a PhD. A PhD is a research based degree and requires a dissertation. A dissertation, especially in an area deemed important to the field of nursing as determined by academia is extremely difficult, time consuming, and well...mind boggling. The other nursing doctoral degrees generally do not require such serious research and then the extremely difficult dissertation. The only reason we have all of these degrees is because the lack of universities willing to accept nursing science as a real entity like biology, chemistry, astrophysics, etc. So in order for the schools to get any type of doctoral degree, the nursing programs had to accept a degree name other than the PhD. In many universities, other schools within the university actually repressed nursing when nursing schools applied for PhD charters.

I personally believe that a doctor of nursing practice should not be the requirement for entry level APN's. Writing a bunch of papers will not make a better clinician. It will not help a new graduate NP feel more prepared for the real world. NP school should be competency based, not paper-based. What makes PA's so successful is that they are inundated with both theory and clinical practice and are taught to be clinically competent. They generally don't write nearly as many fluffy papers as the NP schools make you do, and they don't make PA's study so many irrelevent topics like NP schools do. They get to the meat of it. Either way, expect PA's to still make more than even the DNP-prepared NP's. Medicine doesn't embrace nursing's fluff when it comes to healthcare. It embraces hardcore science, and that's what PA's deal with.

How many of you know what Pharmacists do and have shadowed them? How many people have shadowed OT's, PT's, Audiologists, and other "doctorally prepared" healthcare professionals? Well, I have. And in my time, I have seen absolutely no evidence that anything these other groups do require doctoral level education. Look at their scope of practice. Look at what their daily activities are. What they do is not rocket science. Look at this for what it really is... another way for a group of professionals to call themselves "doctors" and another way for universities to make more money. How does having a bachelor's degree in another area, and then going to school for 3 to 4 years further make a person more clinically competent than when these programs were at the bachelor's level? When these programs were at the bachelor's level, they made you take a ton of very difficult science and mathemeatics courses, and then you got to the good stuff. You had to be very bright with an excellent GPA to get in. You spent 5 years in school learning what you needed to know instead of 8. Let's get real here.

Oh, and then we get the we need more education because things have become so much more complicated. Nope. Doesn't fly with me. We see many of the same diseases we have dealt with all throughout human history. Then we see some new ones. The difference is how we treat the diseases now as opposed to the past. Technology has not made our jobs more difficult. It has made our jobs much easier. Need to know anything about a drug or a medical disease you haven't heard of? Just whip out your PDA. Need to keep track of those VS? Just go to the Trends Review section on the monitor. Need to know what the normal range of the lab values are? Just click on a tab on the pt's computer-based chart and there you go. Having trouble making a differential diagnosis? Just place some s/sx in the laptop computer, and some new diagnoses you may not have thought of pop up. Need to make sure your drip rates are correct and within safe limits? Just access the computer on the IV pump with the pre-programmed drug information and voila! It's all a matter of perspective. Critical thinking can occur at any academic level... not just the doctoral one.

this is just one RN's opinion...

markdanurse · Jan 31, 2008

Someone mentioned the ADN vs BSN motto gain. They were right...we can't seem to get nursing to agree on one academic entry level. But now we have the AACN deciding the DNP must be the minimal entry level requirement for APN's. But have any of you heard of their new proposal that a master's prepared generalist nurse, called a clinical nurse leader (CNL), should be the new entry level requirement into "professional nursing"...NOT the BSN? It's true...just Google it. Just another level of absurdity that nursing does not need right now.

ADN programs cannot go away, as we are facing a huge nursing shortage pretty soon here. We need all of the RN's we can muster within the next ten years. It takes 83 - 89 credits to become an ADN at most of the community colleges in the state where I reside. It is not a typical 60 credit associate degree. The fact is, many of the students who come out of the community colleges seem to be just as bright and competent as the BSN graduates...many times even more technically competent than their BSN counterparts. Nursing doesn't need more managers. It needs more competent bedside nurses. I guarantee if the other professions were facing our shortages, they wouldn't have gone from baccalaureate to doctorally prepared education like they did. More educational requirements is just another way to weed more people out from getting into many of their programs. Nursing is not in a state to be so selective and intellectually elitist. Besides, I have met many people with those ADN's who have bachelor and master degrees in other fields and are quite happy with where they are in life.

Mark