Can Someone Be a Nurse Without Jean Watson??

Nurses General Nursing

Published

Ok now, as I delve back INTO nursing philosophy and theories, I come across, again, the theories of Jean Watson that have been hailed as the greatest thing since polyurethane IV bags - The Caring Theory of Nursing.

Personally, I have never been a fan of Watson, only because I feel that she OVERemphasized the caring aspect, and, in my opinion, dumbified nursing - hence, the ad campaign in the late 80's "If Caring Were Enough, Anyone Could Be a Nurse." Watson threw a fit when she saw this.

As nursing evolves to a more technically challenging field, requiring more acute assessment skills, and as the

"How Women Know" movement which has shaped nursing education for the last decade or so has become archaic, wondering what your thoughts are on if someone can be a nurse and NOT subscribe to the caring theory. Can one be a competent nurse and NOT care about her patients any more deeply than simply getting the job done?

Watson's theory goes a bit deeper than simply "caring" - more so than "caring" about any other job. But "caring" as far as honestly caring about the patient as you would your mom or dad.

Do you think someone CAN be an effective nurse WITHOUT having so much an emphasis on loving her patients?

Originally posted by Susy K

So Brandy, while I agree with your common sense, we can't use that as a basis for our profession. We need to figure out what makes a nurse a nurse, why and if it's different from medicine, and why it's more than just caring about something.

I completely agree. Its so hard to define what makes a nurse a nurse. Most theories that we have are so conceptual, but finding an operational definition besides things like licenses, certifications, education requirements (things that are for the most part concrete) and actions/interventions that we can complete we dont have many tangible items. But if we push that way, we leave out the emotional component, which IS part of nursing as well (rather done for our own gratification or that of the patient), making a nurse just a person who follows an preconceived set of actions. It takes us task-keepers and too mechanical. It leaves the ability to think critically, emotionally connect with the patients, out of the picture.

Im not sure what the answer is. But I dont think we have come to it yet.

Brandy

Specializes in MS Home Health.

Sorry never heard of the chick...........I have been a nurse for 16 years..................guess it was not important enough for my ADN or BS program to teach.........no offense intended. I just think there is so much stuff to cram into the courses already......oh my MS program has not touched on this person either...........sorry...

renerian

Suzy, thank you for posting this question, I love this intellectual stuff. Also, I love to be introduced to some ideas I have not heard before.

Can Someone Be a Nurse Without Jean Watson??

Since I have never even heard of her, I would have to say yes.

Heather

Originally posted by oramar

Suzy, thank you for posting this question, I love this intellectual stuff. Also, I love to be introduced to some ideas I have not heard before.

DITTO !!:)

Specializes in LTC, ER, ICU,.

our first exam included the nursing theories. we did not focus in on watson's but it is possible and i believe true to suggest one can be competent without being a caring person just as we know each person is not spiritual and or believer part of roy's adaptation model which states, "persons and the earth are one; (especially this: they are in god) and of god."

i like newman's system model, especially in her nursing phase of her systems model which emphasies (stress) "a unique profession in that it is concerned with all of the variables affecting an individual's response to stressors, which arre intra-inter-, and extrapersonal in nature. the concern of nursing is to prevent stress invasion, or, following stress invasion, to protect the client's basic structure and obtain or maintain a maximum level of wellness."

great thread.

I am not terribly familiar with Watson's theory, but here is an interesting essay (by a non-nurse) on nursing theory in general. There's a lot I don't agree with, but I found it thought-provoking:

http://www.jefraskin.com/forjef2/jefweb-compiled/published/NursingTheoryForSite.html

(He briefly mention's Orem's self-care deficit theory, which I find useful as a unifying theory in nursing practice).

Jim Huffman, RN

http://www.NetworkforNurses.com

Specializes in Community Health Nurse.
Originally posted by ITSJUSTMEZOE

Have used the" Zoe Theory" for many years now and it seems to work just well.

Everyone gets the same care regardless of who they are, what they have, and who they might be , prince or pauper the standards of care never change. I give 110% to each and every patient.

Zoe

Hi Zoe :)

I'm with you on this. I use what I call the "Renee Theory", and that theory mimics yours to a "T". :kiss :nurse:

Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.

Thsnks for the interesting article Jim.

That was a fascinating article, James. I bookmarked that one for future reference. At first I was ready to call "foul" when he referred to "cult indoctrination" but then he got to the part about precognition and clairvoyance and then I slid under my desk in humiliation for my entire profession.

Some of the more interesting bits:

These theorists have a vested interest in not having their work questioned. Additionally, because Ph.D. nursing theorists occupy many of the higher positions in academic settings, they control who obtains Ph.Ds, and they exclude any skeptical students who would challenge their hegemony. It is a closed system, which can, to its own satisfaction, reject any attack from outside by pointing out that the critics do not have Ph.Ds. in nursing, and therefore do not properly understand nursing theory. The situation is such that many nurses do not go forward to a Ph.D. in nursing because they would have had to publicly subscribe to the absurd tenets of the theory
Nursing theory, as we have seen, is built on undefined jargon and unfalsifyable hypotheses, it is a structure of self-perpetuating myths taken on faith by its practitioners. Nursing theory has become a home for new-age fallacies, "alternative medicine", and hyperbole. Unlike science, nursing theory has no built-in mechanisms for rejecting falsehoods, tautologies, and irrelevancies.
I think he makes a valid point. After providing a very good overview of what nurses actually do, Raskin points out that nursing incorporates so many different scienctific disciplines that it would be impossible to find or invent a single theory that would explain it all.

And while nobody can say with certainty that "energy fields" or precognition or what-have-you do NOT exist, they have no place in nursing theory and only serve to make us look like pseudoscientists, rather than actual ones. It's time to find another direction.

As I said, I certainly don't agree with Raskin on everything, but found it thought-provoking. This is for another thread, but I think we could use having more non-nurses critique us: at least on the theoretical issues. I remember talking with a nurse who specialized in pain management (and had written a textbook on the issue) and she complained that some of the theoretical groups were like a teen girl's slumber party: no one would seriously criticize another's work. Everyone just played a game of patty-cake, not wanting someone else to criticize them.

As far as the theories Raskin speaks about, I have a certain weakness for oddball theories, as my wife and children will testify to. I only ask that the theories be backed up by sound research, and some of those he mentions -- especially therapeutic touch -- are not backed up by much of anything.

Jim Huffman, RN

http://www.NetworkforNurses.com

I've never fully understood Martha Rogers theory, which is probably why I can't relate to it. I do know nurses who are much more knowledgable than I about it. These nurses are strong advocates for phenomenon such as therapuetic touch, reiki , yoga, aroma therapy, etc. If they want to use the theory to define, explain, and conduct research as to how these interventions help patients, more power to them and more power to the patient.

Linda

+ Add a Comment