Life-Span class is shortening mine. - page 7

I'm just whinning........certainly to a group of intellectuals that can somehow utilize this contradictory load of crap. I'm certain this will be the only useless part of school, but I just can't... Read More

  1. by   live4today
    Originally posted by Peeps Mcarthur
    Cheerful.....This is very nice of you to extend such courtesy. If more discussions were conducted in such a manner we would all learn more about eachothers viewpoints.:kiss

    I don't know how Erickson fits in here, but I'm sure we could somehow do it.

    Any ideas?
    GOOD TRY...Not half bad, Peeps! Now...about Erikson

    Okay...let's take a look at HOW Erik oh boy plays into this...psychologically speaking from a nurse's professional point of view:

    As a nurse trained in the theory of Erikson via that much needed course of Life Span...that our beloved Peeps and others hate so much...nauseating...I know, I know...:chuckle...but...nonetheless, we must apply ourselves if we expect to pass that nauseating course.

    ACCORDING TO OUR OL BOY ERIKSON'S THEORY, Little Miss Susie is in the: Industry vs. Inferiority stage. In that stage...Susie being 10 and all...the problem lies in the fact that children in this age group are "collectors". They love to collect anything from marbles, dolls, stuffed animals, seashells, jewelry, stamps, poetry, and other trinkets. When they are separated from their "collective items" that are very near and dear to this stage of development, they are fearfully out of touch with those things they seem to connect with...for whatever reason...unbeknownst to most reflected in Susie's parents' behavior towards her. BUT...Nurse Peeps comes along and upon learning why Susie is so upset...being that she successfully passed with understanding her Life Spans course in her student nurse days...knows exactly how to respond to Susie's the same time relaying any added anxiety to her already suffering dilemma. This is what Nurse Peeps does:

    Giving Susie a doll may comfort her...may not...that isn't what is upsetting Susie. She feels at a 'loss' in a big empty space called "hospital nausea"...parents focus is on Susie getting well so they can take her home, etc....Susie needs to feel "secure" in her her anxiety is due to insecurity of being away from what makes her feel secure...her own stuff that she collects and forms an emotional attachment to.

    Nurse Peeps sits next to Susie's bedside so as to provide her with direct eye contact. Don't baby her. That's the LAST thing a 10 year old wants when they are missing a part of themselves that nobody seems to relate to but them. You provide Susie with therapeutic communication skills that you learned in nursing school...keeping in mind the stage of development Susie is in...Life know...Erikson...that STUFF. As you allow Susie to vent her anxiety to you, your job is to stay focused on her at all times...listening more than talking...then not belittling her for what you might think is say to her "So, what I hear you saying is you feel unsafe in a place that does not have your personal things surrounding you, especially your dolls and stuffed animals. Is that correct, Susie?" Susie says, "Yeeeesss" as she sniffles, drying up her tears. You wait for her next response. Your focus should never be on the parents, but on the child --- she's the patient -- even though in pediatrics...pedi nurses know that the true patients at times are the parents. Susie may still miss her collection of dolls and stuffed animals, but at least you...Nurse Peeps...because of your professional judgment in being able to "connect" to the stage of development Susie is in...were able to resolve her anxiety for the time being. Next time you enter Susie's room, she will have added you to her most favorite people list.


    In the area of psycho/social behavior, you would write the following Nursing diagnosis:

    Anxiety r/t feeling insecure -- ie. "I miss my dolls and stuffed animals." a) offer therpeutic communication skills with the understanding of patient's stage of development according to Erikson: Industry vs. Inferiority (b) offer Tylenol prn as ordered for patient comfort (c) offer comfort measures: direct eye contact when speaking/listening to child allowing her to vent/express emotional feelings (d) have parents bring patients favorite selection of dolls and stuffed animals to ease patients anxiety until discharge..............blah blah blah
    Last edit by live4today on Jul 4, '02
  2. by   Peeps Mcarthur
    I can't just give her the doll?
    I knew she was needing something familiar.

    Do nurses REALLY write about Erikson in the progress notes?

    BTW..........Industry vs Inferiority is a theory applied to the learning of new things(industry) and the the feeling of coming up short when not accomplishing the "tasks" (inferiority). I think "trust vs Mistrust" would fit the scenario better(food,comfort,the familiar), but then we have to assume that the patient needs to get past it and move on to the next "task" in order to develop.........according to Erikson they are still an infant.

    Anxiety/feeling insecure 2nd to unfamiliar surroundings.
    Giver her something familiar.
    Avoid eye contact with exhausted and angry parents at all costs!!!

    Like the point about eye contact with the patient and listening, but the rambling/blubbering will continue until the favorite item has been secured. That was my intervention. I didn't need a day of psychosocial training to tell me that.

    IF I am EXPECTED to write that in my notes, then that's a different story,but I knew the kid needed a familiar item and the crisis would have been quelled all the same.
    I have not failed to "treat" the patient.

    You are sooo right about the parents being the patient. A major reason I will not end up working in peds.
  3. by   live4today
    hello again my newfound psych student!

    i don't really know what nurses today write in patient charts...more than likely...they are using whatever clinical nurse education mandates for them to use...just my guess. i do know that we used it quite a bit during my nursing school college days...especially when writing our patients' care plans that we had to be graded on quite frequently. then, when i became a nurse, i continued to use erikson in defining my patients psycho-social needs according to their age. as long as there was a place on the patient care plan for it, i made use of theory and in practice because i am a 100% fan of erikson. why? because he has the best theory of all in regards to a person's psycho-social behavior unlike some of the other nut cases i had to study...freud, piaget (sp?), and others i tried not to remember after testing on them. :chuckle

    trust vs. mistrust is for infants from 'birth to age one'. btw: are you a parent, peeps? if not, the first year of a human being's life is the foundation for them to learn trust vs. mistrust. if a parent or guardian fails to establish this very important truism in their little ones during that time of their life, those are the human beings who...unknowingly...suffer throughout their lives for not being able to tap into why they are so insecure, can't seem to trust anyone, always doubting if they are loved, the most fearful for whatever reason they can't seem to connect with, and so forth. these are the kids...turned adults...that society sees in therapy most times. i am one of those kids...turned adults.

    tomorrow, i would like to continue our saga of "life span" together. i really do enjoy this topic, and if it helps to ease your tensions...or any other student's tension...about the importance of this course, then it will be worth it all for us to discuss it until the cows come home...if you like. :chuckle however, right now i am going to pop me some popcorn and watch the july 4th fireworks. if it doesn't get too late, i may sign back on late tonight. i hope you are enjoying your july 4th time with your loved ones, and look forward to chatting with you or any other student later. not only do i enjoy helping and encouraging students, i also enjoy learning from students. imagine that, peeps! i believe i can learn something from you about this...i already am. :kiss
    Last edit by live4today on Jul 4, '02
  4. by   Peeps Mcarthur
    No disrepect intended Cheerful,but how on earth are you supposed to establish whether or not someone mistrusted as an infant?

    How could anybody remember that?

    That must be one of the great unanswered questions because I just can't figure out how the Erikson boy got that to pass muster.

    But anyhoo,
    God bless America:kiss

    We had a heck of a great fireworks show out here in Columbia, MD.

    You have a great 4th Cheerful.
  5. by   live4today
    Peeps...our fireworks were pretty darn good too! Glad you enjoyed yours.

    I don't know what more to say to you in regards to my favorite Psychologist...Erik Erikson. Maybe after you finally get through that course and begin your nursing classes...IF you still want to continue in that direction...perhaps then you will begin to see some of what I have already dealt with as a RN in the area of psycho/social development among the patient population. Some people get this guy, and some don't. Go figure. It's been fun sharing this information back and forth with you. Having been a clinical instructor once upon a season for CNAs...I am use to students who "get it".........students who "don't get it"..........and students who just don't give a damn one way or the other because they are bored stiff with the material (these are the students who drop out...or if they succeed through the bet is they don't last long in the health field). Nursing is mostly ATTITUDE and PERSONALITY with a good blend of CHARACTER, SUBSTANCE, COMPASSION, and a lot of ESP. :chuckle Which category are you in, Peeps? I have an idea...but......only you know what you are capable of pulling off. Have a great weekend! :kiss
    Last edit by live4today on Jul 5, '02
  6. by   Peeps Mcarthur
    But you must answer how you came up with a theory don't you?

    You can't have a "theory" without an "hypothesis" that is not yet disproven

    That's how science works.

    That's why psychology seems made-up to me. Why should I believe Erikson? How did he establish his theory?

    Seems irresponsible to just believe without proof.
  7. by   live4today
    Originally posted by Peeps Mcarthur
    But you must answer how you came up with a theory don't you?

    You can't have a "theory" without an "hypothesis" that is not yet disproven

    That's how science works.

    That's why psychology seems made-up to me. Why should I believe Erikson? How did he establish his theory?

    Seems irresponsible to just believe without proof.
    Future Nurse is a link to Erik's bio online so you and others can research more about him "online"...if you desire to.

    I decided to do a little online research this afternoon just so I could post a site where those who desire to read specifics about Erikson could do so. There are other materials online about him...and that site, but Erikson is the only one I agree with.

    If I made up the theory, yes I would personally prove how I came up with it, but since I did not make Erikson's theories, it would be up to him to prove how he came up with it and the whys. You can read about some of that at his site I posted above.

    I believe his theory to be true based on applications I have made of his Stages of Development theory on the many patients I have personally cared for, as well as those I have met in real kids for one...friends...other family members...even myself.

    Erikson's theories have NOT to my knowledge ever been DISPROVEN unless you are aware that they have????
    As for why should you believe Erikson? You don't have to any more than anyone else who questions his theory UNTIL you put his theory to a test yourself....then you can works, it doesn't work, etc. Have you tried applying Erikson's eight stages of development with children through adults that you personally know?

    Now, nursing students do not have to like or believe in Erikson's
    theories...or any other psychologists theories if they choose NOT to...however...if you want to become a nurse, and the course is a required part of the curriculum...what choice do you have but to get through the Life Span class??? It's either take the course...or forget about becoming a nurse. Even if you find a college that does NOT require the Life Span course to become a nurse, I guarantee you that you will learn about Erikson, Freud, Piaget, Maslow, and others somewhere in the context of one of your actual nursing textbooks. These guys are mentioned in the Med/Surg textbooks for nursing students, so it would behoove you to apply yourself for the sake of reaching your goal to become a nurse. As a RN who previously instructed students...this is what I advise and encourage you to do.
    Last edit by live4today on Jul 5, '02
  8. by   Peeps Mcarthur
    I most definitely have to do it.
    That is the only reason I ponder the great truths.

    Eriksons "theories" cannot be disproven.

    That's what makes them invalid from sciences point of view.
    There is no way we can find out what a baby is thinking without a Vulcan Mind-Meld.

    Of course I can say that you have a commitment issue because of a "trust vs mistrust" unresolved crises when you were a baby.

    How could that be disproven? In other words,how can it be TESTED.
    It cannot. "trust vs mistrust" cannot be validated by faith in science, it must be tested by sound scientific method.


    This one is not and that makes it incomplete and needing to start back at a TESTABLE hypothesis.

    If you believe in Erikson's ideas then you must believe by faith at least in the case of "trust vs mistrust"..........right?
    I'm not saying that all of it is invalid but I am saying that "trust vs mistrust" is absolutely invalid because it cannot be tested.

    I always question information before it's accepted.
    I would do that with a vital sign, a doctors order, a medication and I would certainly do it for a way I'm being taught to think about what my patient might be thinking. That is a fair statement of disagreement.

    So.......must it be by faith then?

    I present to you that it cannot be learned because faith cannot be learned.
  9. by   live4today
    originally posted by peeps mcarthur.............."i most definitely have to do it...........that is the only reason i ponder the great truths..................eriksons "theories" cannot be disproven. that's what makes them invalid from sciences point of view. there is no way we can find out what a baby is thinking without a vulcan mind-meld......................of course i can say that you have a commitment issue because of a "trust vs mistrust" unresolved crises when you were a baby. how could that be disproven?"

    cheerfuldoer responds: peeps...i agree with all of the above.

    however...the remainder of your post affects me in the following ways

    peeps says: "in other words,how can it be tested.
    it cannot. "trust vs mistrust" cannot be validated by faith in science, it must be tested by sound scientific method............all valid theories are testable.............this one is not and that makes it incomplete and needing to start back at a testable hypothesis."

    cheerfuldoer responds: "trust vs. mistrust" is proven through the many people studied by erikson over the life span of his career as a follower...but not firm believer in freud...he was known as freud's superego...

    if today i were part of erikson's study...i would be one example of the proof scientists seek in order to validate erikson's theories.

    you nor i can prove electricity exists because we can't see can we??? yet...we flick on that lightswitch, turn on our radios and stereos, use our microwaves and computers at the flick of a switch....and so forth. hmmmmmmm...wonder where that juice is coming from since we can't see it???

    peeps says: "if you believe in erikson's ideas then you must believe by faith at least in the case of "trust vs mistrust"..........right?
    i'm not saying that all of it is invalid but i am saying that "trust vs mistrust" is absolutely invalid because it cannot be tested."

    renee replies: it is not by faith that i believe in erikson's belief comes from having tried and so proven his 8 stages of human development. i, myself, am living proof of his theory because it works for me in whatever area i have used it home with my family members, friends, acquaintances, pediatrics, adult inpatient units, and so forth....therefore...proven...imh&professionalo!

    peeps stated: "i always question information before it's accepted. i would do that with a vital sign, a doctors order, a medication and i would certainly do it for a way i'm being taught to think about what my patient might be thinking. that is a fair statement of it be by faith then?"

    renee replies: as well you should question an order you don't understand, and/or professionally believe to be harmful to a patient if carried out. bravo on that truism! however...carrying out orders given by man should not be done by faith, or it could cost you your future nursing license...and we have too great a nursing shortage, so we wouldn't want that to happen now would we. :chuckle any orders you carry out when carrying for patients had better be done on nothing short of accurate knowledge learned as a nurse...not by faith either!

    peeps final response:..."i present to you that it cannot be learned because faith cannot be learned."

    renee's final reply:

    i agree with you that faith cannot be learned. it is of my personal spiritual belief that faith comes by hearing............hearing through the word of god! faith is not and cannot be can only come from a profound trust placed in someone who would never fail us...and no man can make that promise...nor should he/she be made to....because human beings are sinners and too fallible as fleshly carnates to not cower in the midst of fear...thereby...caving in at times...even if for a tiny wee bit...with the "faith" we may have hoped we could count on from those we trusted to care for us. i don't know about you....but my faith never fails because i only place my faith in the living god...whom...i...without a shadow of a doubt...and scientific evidence is not needed in my belief just is what it is because god said it...i believe and have complete faith in it...and that settles it for me.
    Last edit by live4today on Jul 5, '02
  10. by   live4today
    p.s....why do brown or black cows eat green grass but produce white milk, peeps??? are you a milk lover? why drink that white milk that came from a black or brown cow if scientifically it hasn't been proven as to why the milk comes out white??? oh.......another unproven theory would be: why do moms of many colors eat foods of many colors and textures, but their milk always comes out a thin bluish/white smooth color and consistency...turning into white opaque milk that we rightly insist is better for our darling babies??? where's the scientific proof on that one. i've got more, if you want to compare notes. :d
  11. by   Nursemelo
    ughhhh all of this makes me rember my horable lifespan class last semester!!! our class was teleconferenced which means i got to sit there and listen to a black box talk for 3 hours!! and i was at night from 6 until 9 after i had already been at school since 8 AAAHH!!! and the teacher was absolutly crazy...she would tell us these weird stories and it was just such a bore i would end up sitting there snacking and working on physiology labs or just going home...thank goodness she couldn't see us because the whole class was rarely there. so i can totally understand were all of you are coming from !!! we used to sing C is for credit (instead of cookie, like the cookie monster)that's good enough for me!!!
  12. by   Peeps Mcarthur
    Because you can examine the source.
    You have the cows and the human female and thier baseline intake is readily observable as a comparison of thier output.

    You cannot however observe the "feelings" of a baby, or input,therefore you have no baseline with which to measure an output in the form of life-span.

    I see how you got into this. It is wonderful to get your opinnions and explore how the "other side" thinks.

    Back to the discussion.

    Here's an example of faith becoming fact.
    Before the flight of John Glen into orbit around the earth the hypothesis that the earth was flat was invalid because it was not observable or measurable. In spite of this glaring discrepency the majority of the earths population believed it was flat.
    Thier reasoning,which they strongly believed,hypothesised that it was possible to travel for a great distance and the horizon would remain constant so the earth must be flat because we have traveled farther than the eye can see so we would have certainly passed the point of the curvature and slid down its side if it was round!
    Since it was not yet observable,you would need
    faith to belive the flat earth hypothesis could be proven simply by moving along its surface.

    Although this experiment proving the earth is flat and its results are repeatable.................just as Eriksons insecure adults are repeatable...........The baseline,or starting point,is not observable in comparison to the end result.

    The feelings of the baby's insecurity would have to be observed as having existed in the first place in order to be said that they "still" linger in the adult,just as the starting point in relation to the end point in the flat earth experiment would have to be observed in order to establish that it "still" is flat.

    Neither trust or mistrust can be observed in an infant. They can be communicated by an adult,even assumed by body language,but the "body language" of an infant is reflex because it lacks the motor skills of expression.

    So your left with communication.

    So tell me how you observe trust vs mistrust in an infant in order to follow it through life-span?

    You have only your faith in a flat earth.
  13. by   darby1
    I guess the lifespan course you guys are talking about is similar to the Developmental Psychology class that I'll be taking soon. I'll admit that General psych. was kind of boring, but it was an easy "A". Give me two of those Lifespan courses I hope to get the same instructor for Dev. Psych., as I had for Gen. Psych. He is really cool, and our class was kind of laid back. He would even go over class notes a few days before the tests. I pretty much cruised in that class. As long as you showed up for class, and participated in class "labs", things went really well. I wish all my classes were this boring and easy. I'll take all of them that I can get. I actually found psychology pretty interesting, so that made time go by a little better. Also, some things were kind of like review, such as chapters dealing with the nervous system. I had studied some of this in A&P, so I had a good understanding about a lot of those subjects. This helped to cut down on some of my study time, at least in that class. Anyway, it's been nice reading the replies, and I look forward to hearing from you all in the upcoming months. Thanks for your time. Darby
    Last edit by darby1 on Jul 7, '02