If "life after death" or prayer were proven true how would it affect nursing care?

Roland · Oct 8, 2004

Essentially, I was asking if it would become as common as say "range of motion exercises" or "immunizations" of course not everyone partakes of ROM exercises or vaccines, but they are "mainstream" interventions because of the overwhelming evidence to support their efficacy.

leslie :-D · Oct 8, 2004

It would not affect my care one bit. I already render care respectful of people's belief systems, period. I believe in life after death, therefore, dont' fear death myself.

you know, when i answered this question, i wasn't thinking specifically of nsg care, or should i say, MY nsg care....

but was wondering on how it would impact our medical system, if mds knew unequivocably that there was life after death....how would that affect the care THEY give.....

would the attitude be "what difference does it make, he's going to have an after life anyway?"

and i am sure some nurses would feel the same way too.

i still don't understand the prayer question, as it would all depend on what is being prayed for.

for all i know, some meanie could be praying that i suffer in hell for kissing her boyfriend back in 10th grade.

i want more specifics.

and i want to feel more secure in that whoever is praying for me, really really likes me. :rolleyes:

leslie

dimpsogre · Oct 9, 2004

The existence of black holes, Newton’s Universal Theory of Gravitation, the ‘big bang’, and the Theory of Evolution are not in dispute in the general scientific community, although they may be in theological or otherwise non-scientific areas. If one desires to check the status of any of these concepts in the scientific community, check the scientific literature—i.e. current peer-reviewed scientific journal papers. You will find that none of these concepts are in dispute by the vast majority of scientists (although the details of each of these concepts may be hotly debated) and are considered scientific facts (with the possible exception of black holes—I don’t know for certain whether this is considered a scientific ‘fact’ yet).

the big bang theory is in direct conflict with the second law of thermodynamics

Yes, just like Evolution, right? Something to consider: if this is true, do you find it interesting that the scientific community (and in particular, scientists in physics and astronomy) didn’t yet figure this out? I would recommend that you check an actual scientific source (i.e. the peer-reviewed scientific literature) rather than a non-scientific source (such as creationist literature) for information regarding scientific laws and theories.

....but you have thousands on millions of people who swear that there is a God based on what they have seen, felt or experienced first hand and they are just antedoctal evidence? I don't get the so called scientific community at all....but that isn't the point of this thread either.

The methodology of science is picky, isn’t it? Realize that what may be considered perfectly valid in one epistemology (such as religion or rationalism) is not necessarily valid in another (empiricism; the methodology of science). What an individual claims to have seen or experienced is not scientific evidence, nor is what the ‘majority’ of people believe. At minimum, for a claim to even be considered a scientific hypothesis that can be investigated with the scientific method, it must at least have: 1) the potential to be refuted (i.e. a ‘proof of falseness’ ) test, which most religious claims do not; and 2) be able to be repeated, confirmed, and ‘measured’ in some way by any independent researcher.

Prayer in healthcare is an important topic. Here there is substantial scientific evidence that demonstrates involving religiously-inclined patients in religious activity including prayer has significant, measurable health benefits. This is a fact and is not in dispute. Unfortunately, there is no credible scientific evidence that has shown that intercessory prayer (i.e. praying for a patient without his knowledge) has any affect.

Wow, what a ‘know-it-all’ I am today!

Hope I didn't offend.

Peace.

fergus51 · Oct 9, 2004

I mentionned this to a friend and she said docs would immediately claim prayer was only in the scope of MDs and start billing heavily for it!

NannaNurse · Oct 9, 2004

I don't need 'PROOF' as some may put it. My faith and heart tell me that there IS life after death and prayer DOES work. Regardless of what others may say..........those are MY beliefs.

I pray for all of my patients, everyday. I also pray that I can 'be & do' what I need for my patients that will give them a good day, a productive day. One of less pain and also that I can be a blessing to them. My care for my patients in not just in the 'physical' care that I provide, but the emotional AND spiritual care as well.

If a patients asks, and I have had them ask, to be prayed for or to pray with them, I consider that an honor. That my patient feels that special connection with me. Our company motto is, in part.......'through our exceptional heathcare, we reveal the healing presence of God'.......I consider that an honor.

Roland · Oct 9, 2004

I've pondered the conundrum posed by the Second Law of T myself as it relates to the Big Bang, and evolution. Essentially, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says that Entropy (think randomness) is always maximized. Your socks don't "spontanieously" organize themselves in your chest of drawers instead they tend to become progressively more disorganized. The catch is that you can have a decrease in randomness (Entropy) so long as you have enough work to account for this decrease. In Physics work is often expressed as Enthalpy (heat, think kilocalories for instance). Sciencetists say that the "order" which we see in the Universe (things like rocks, atoms, you and me) was achieved via enourmous amounts of heat energy. Thus, there was more than enough enthalpy to explain the decrease in entropy. I'm not sure that I buy this explanation (because to explain ALL of the order in the universe it would take one heck of alot of Enthalpy).

donmurray · Oct 9, 2004

We may not buy it, but the vast majority of physicists and other experts in the field do.Why would all of them lie? Science and that scientific method ensure that no theory or even law is set in stone. They are simply a reflection of the best knowledge we have at a given time, to be modified and updated when new information/evidence is assembled and tested.

Faith or belief is not amenable by its nature to being tested. It has to be accepted in spite of, rather than because of the evidence, or it wouldn't be faith.

Patients respond to placebo medicines, essentially because they believe they will help. how much more so will that effect work for a religious believer who is prayed for?

Roland · Oct 9, 2004

There have been a good number of double blind, case controlled studies involving prayer which seemed to show effects on patient outcomes. In addition, there have been other studies where colonies of bacteria, plants ect. have also seemed to respond to prayer (even at a distance). Furthermore, quantum physicists have done a large number of experiments which seem to demonstrate a "non local effect" that cannot be explained with our current understanding of the universe (Superstring theory et al is one possible theoretical explanation). Of course these experiments are preliminary, controversial, and often disputed.

However, my overall point was what IF we COULD demonstrate prayer, and or life after death (to include reincarnation) to the satisfaction of the average person (and scientist). How would it effect health care?

leslie :-D · Oct 9, 2004

dang.

all these brains i have for colleagues.

i truly didn't understand half (actually most) of what you guys were talking about.

but if it helps, i do have a huge poster of einstein. :rolleyes:

and as for life after death, some do not believe it to be in the form of reincarnation so that would need clarification.

leslie

Tweety, BSN, RN · Oct 9, 2004

Perhaps as was stated it would affect healthcare and treatment, but from the patient and families perspective. Maybe the family won't go for heroics medicinally with the comfort of knowing their loved one will live on. Maybe someone with a terminal illness will say "I'll pass on the chemo, please give me prayer instead".

Of course there is the delimema of what if you pray for a person and they get sicker and they die. Just as happens now. Would they be happy knowing with assurance it was God's will? Or be miserable perhaps they weren't praying enough.

leslie :-D · Oct 9, 2004

Of course there is the delimema of what if you pray for a person and they get sicker and they die. Just as happens now. Would they be happy knowing with assurance it was God's will? Or be miserable perhaps they weren't praying enough.

my sentiments exactly.

and again, who knows what one is praying for?

something you just cannot assume.

dimpsogre · Oct 11, 2004

I've pondered the conundrum posed by the Second Law of T myself as it relates to the Big Bang, and evolution. Essentially, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says that Entropy (think randomness) is always maximized. Your socks don't "spontanieously" organize themselves in your chest of drawers instead they tend to become progressively more disorganized.

This is not exactly true. First note that entropy may either increase (for irreversible processes) or stay the same (for reversible processes). However, it is true that very few processes are actually 'reversible.'

But more importantly, the relationship between "entropy" and "order" in the physical sciences is a vague relationship at best. That is, "order" and "randomness" are only important with respect to the laws of thermo if the order causes a change in the 'useful' energy of the system. For example, if I have a deck of cards randomly stacked, the deck has exactly the same entropy as a deck of cards perfectly ordered. Why? Because if I burn both decks of cards in a calorimeter and measure the heat output across a certain temperature range (this is in fact how the entropy content of a mass is determined), the results will be exactly the same. Thus be careful with the flawed analogy 'entropy' = 'order'. I think this definition became blurred in recent years because the IT field uses its own definition of 'entropy', which has nothing at all to do with the laws of thermo, and in this field it simply defined as a measure of mathematical randomness.

The catch is that you can have a decrease in randomness (Entropy) so long as you have enough work to account for this decrease. In Physics work is often expressed as Enthalpy (heat, think kilocalories for instance). Sciencetists say that the "order" which we see in the Universe (things like rocks, atoms, you and me) was achieved via enourmous amounts of heat energy. Thus, there was more than enough enthalpy to explain the decrease in entropy. I'm not sure that I buy this explanation (because to explain ALL of the order in the universe it would take one heck of alot of Enthalpy).

Be careful here. The net total entropy of the universe is always increasing (or staying the same). However, the entropy of any object within the universe may easily decreased by reordering its structure such that it can produce more useful work. Cooling an object down, for example, generally decreases the entropy of that object. However, the net entropy change in the entire universe *increases*. That is, work was done (via the compressor) to cool down food in your refrigerator. This transfer of energy (burning coal to produce the electricity to run the motor, etc) increased the total entropy beyond that of the localized decrease in entropy of the frozen foods, such that the *net* entropy in the universe increased. Same can be said for biological systems. Some creatures may experience a decrease in entropy via evolution (And is this even true? Do biological systems have any less entropy than non-biological? The question to answer is: what is the fuel potential for living things vs. non-living things) but the use and transfer of energy used in growth and development (ultimately, from the sun) causes a net increase in entropy to the universe.

Cool discussion.