Studying nursing theory, came across Jean Watson

[algebra_demystified]

I haven't read much of her work, but what I've seen so far looks like the ravings of a schizophrenic. It looks like she rejects the medical model completely and believes in telepathy and mind reading over distances, and unmeasurable electromagnetic fields that are created when nurses care about their patients.

What is a "mindbodyspirit" and what am I supposed to do with it? Does she even believe in germ theory?

I'm having a hard time believing that this is taken seriously in graduate level classes.

[Boog'sCRRN246, RN]

Not only is it taken seriously, a hospital in my area formed their nursing care model after her theories. She lectured at said hospital last year when I was doing clinicals. She's...interesting.

[JBudd, MSN]

There is a huge thread on Jean Watson in here, named "can you be a nurse without Jean Watson?". She is a huge name in nursing theory, mostly for her thoughts on caring. Look beyond the catch phrases, not everyone agrees with her but she does have a lot of influence.

Actually there are multiple threads, do a search on the top of the page here.

[wtbcrna, MSN, DNP, CRNA]

Stick with evidenced based practice it will serve you much better. Nursing theory is outdated concept IMHO.

[GM2RN]

Stick with evidenced based practice it will serve you much better. Nursing theory is outdated concept IMHO.

LOL That's the first time I have heard someone voice that opinion but I totally agree!

[PostOpPrincess, BSN, RN]

She's interesting alright.

"Enuf" said.

[unwell]

I believe she is COMPLETELY insane. I love how you used the words "schizophrenic Ravings" I am in complete agreement with this description. In the last semester of my ADN class last year we were required to do a research paper on Jean Watson and her theories. We were required to include our thoughts on how her theories fit into nursing practice today. I called her theories unrealistic and basically stupid. Unfortunately for me my professor was a big supporter of Watson and could not put her opinions to the side while grading my paper. I got my 1st and only failing grade ever. She is completely crazy and making money off of it.

[SmilingBluEyes]

I agree with evidence-based practices being best.I find theorists very educational, even if I don't agree. There is NOTHING on earth wrong with studying and trying to understand them. But I do prefer to base my practices on sound, strong evidence that supports continuing them, and dropping those that are not so-supported.

[unwell]

Something kind of interesting- One of my classmates went to a Watson Convention for extra credit, and enrolled in a study Watson was doing. Watson invented what is in essence an electronic mood ring. It is a small box with different color lights and electrodes. The electrodes hook to the patient like a pulse-ox and it lights up whatever color you are feeling. Like one color was for anxiety, stress etc.

[NRSKarenRN, BSN, RN]

Great thread: Can Someone be a Nurse without Jean Watson?

[llg, PhD, RN]

Those of you who believe we should eliminate nursing "theory" and just focus on "evidence-based practice" are ignoring the very foundation of "evidence" and "scientific inquiry."

The whole scientific process (by which that evidence you value is produce) is by definition the development and testing of theories. A scientists develops a theory, proposes hypotheses based on that theory, and then conducts experiments to test those hypotheses -- thereby supporting the theory or finding weakness/errors in it. That's what science is. Didn't you learn that in high school?

Most of the evidence used in "evidence-based practice" comes from scientific inquiry and/or the rational evaluation of data -- organized into a theoretical framework of some kind. For example, we wash our hands because we have a theory that if we remove the bugs on our hands, we will reduce the spread of certain diseases. That theory has been supported by research studies: so, we incorporate that theory into our set of beliefs. But that basic germ theory, is still a theory. So, I think we can agree that not all theory is bad. There are good theories out there.

Just because you don't like one person's theory -- or one person's approach to theory, doesn't mean that all theory is bad. The above example of germ theory and handwashing is a good example of a strong theory that most of us should be able to admit is good and useful.

Unfortunately, when people start to talk about nursing theory ... they often jump to the theories that are the most unusual and/or "attention grabbing." The controversial theories are not representative of all theories, but they make for interesting conversation and challenge the mind to stretch and consider new ways of thinking about common phenomena. Such theories often raise a few valuable issues, but can turn people off because they don't conform to the predominant societal views.

A person brave enough to take the risks of suggesting radically different ideas is probably going to be wrong about a few things even if they might be right about some others. That's where the need for research comes in -- we need to test theories by doing the research to find out which aspects of the "new perspective" hold up under testing and which ones do not. A true scientist approaches a theory with an open mind and withholds judgment until the work is done that either supports or disproves the theory.

Watson's theory is very "provacative," -- it provokes strong reactions in people by suggesting that we should pay more attention to the spiritual aspects of human well-being. She developed the theory in response to a culture that had seemed to become so focuses on physiology that it was ignoring the person who was the patient. There are some things about Watson's theory that I value and there are other things that I hate -- but the fact that I don't like some aspects of her work does not negate the entire body of work by all nursing scientists and theorists that is the theoretical foundation of nursing science.

There have been hundreds of nurse theorists in our history -- and new theories are being developed every year. Don't denigrate all of them just because you don't like a few of them that your instructor chose to incorporate into a theory course.

[Zookeeper3]

When you really get into taking care of patients, all that is crap. We don't tell our alzheimers patient 87 times a day her mother is dead... as she is 80 years old herself, only to have her grieve for hours on the death of her mom... we learn through experience that the theory is crap. "can you fold these washcloths for me, mom is resting now and I need your help" Or you can take down and medicate a crazy 87 year old who just was told "mom is dead, you're 87". Theory tells you to do what doesn't work.

We can look at maslow, sure air is more important than food. try to tell that to the non compliant asthmatic renal patient who is on bipap, can't breathe is 100 lbs over weight and demands a full meal, needing the mask off ... and could care less that you teach them that they will buy a breathing tube..."I'm huuuunngry feed me".

These theorists have not taken care of my patient population.