Is my textbook wrong?

elkpark · Mar 7, 2017

Welcome to allnurses! :balloons:

That sounds like a pretty reasonable description to me, given that there are many different possible ways to word explanations of "empathy" vs. "sympathy" and no single one is the only "right" description. In what way is it "the opposite" of what you have been told in the past?

ItsThatJenGirl, CNA · Mar 7, 2017

That's the opposite of what I've been taught, too. I was taught that sympathy was feeling compassion for another persons hardships and empathy was more personal - putting yourself in the other persons shoes and feeling what they feel.

HouTx, BSN, MSN, EdD · Mar 7, 2017

NOPE - that's correct. Empathy is the ability to understand the other person's situation without actually sharing their emotional state. It's an essential skill for clinicians. We have to remain sufficiently detached in order to function at peak capacity. Everything has to focus on the patient's needs, not ours.

FolksBtrippin, BSN, RN · Mar 7, 2017

You are learning the nursing definition of these words, which may be different from the way they are used elsewhere. Your textbook is correct.

luvgshepherds88 · Mar 8, 2017

In my early 20's, I worked for a funeral home and actually got a talking to from my boss for showing sympathy to a family instead of empathy. The textbook description is exactly what she told me.

Extra Pickles · Mar 8, 2017

That's the opposite of what I've been taught, too. I was taught that sympathy was feeling compassion for another persons hardships and empathy was more personal - putting yourself in the other persons shoes and feeling what they feel.

No, the other way around is correct. Think of a scenario in which two people are sitting together, one is expressing how she feels at having her beloved cat die. The other person, who has ALSO had a beloved cat die, can sympathize with her, she recognizes the pain in the loss because she herself has felt it. Think of the "S" in "sympathize" to mean "self". Quick memory tool :-)

If the same two people are talking about one of them having had her cat die and the other one has never had a pet of hers die, she can empathize, which is to recognize that the other person is feeling a terrible loss, but not know that loss herself.

Most of the time I empathize with patients, as my story frequently doesn't mirror their own experiences. Sometimes I sympathize, as I've experienced the very same thing.

Does that help?

elkpark · Mar 8, 2017

No, the other way around is correct. Think of a scenario in which two people are sitting together, one is expressing how she feels at having her beloved cat die. The other person, who has ALSO had a beloved cat die, can sympathize with her, she recognizes the pain in the loss because she herself has felt it. Think of the "S" in "sympathize" to mean "self". Quick memory tool :-)
If the same two people are talking about one of them having had her cat die and the other one has never had a pet of hers die, she can empathize, which is to recognize that the other person is feeling a terrible loss, but not know that loss herself.
Most of the time I empathize with patients, as my story frequently doesn't mirror their own experiences. Sometimes I sympathize, as I've experienced the very same thing.
Does that help?

At the risk of beating a dead horse, this is the opposite of every definition of the two words I have encountered over the years. In my experience, "empathy" is considered the ability to put yourself in the other person's shoes, to (do your best to) understand the other person's experience and feelings about that experience (whether or not you have actually experienced a similar experience). Sympathy is feeling compassion for the person's loss or experience, feeling sorry for them, without actually considering or understanding the thoughts and emotions related to the experience or loss. In my experience, your examples would be reversed -- the person who has also lost a cat would be in a good position to empathize with the other person, and the person who hasn't lost a beloved pet would be able to sympathize (feel sorry for the person's loss), but not really understand what the person may be going through.

Extra Pickles · Mar 8, 2017

At the risk of beating a dead horse, this is the opposite of every definition of the two words I have encountered over the years. In my experience, "empathy" is considered the ability to put yourself in the other person's shoes, to (do your best to) understand the other person's experience and feelings about that experience (whether or not you have actually experienced a similar experience). Sympathy is feeling compassion for the person's loss or experience, feeling sorry for them, without actually considering or understanding the thoughts and emotions related to the experience or loss. In my experience, your examples would be reversed -- the person who has also lost a cat would be in a good position to empathize with the other person, and the person who hasn't lost a beloved pet would be able to sympathize (feel sorry for the person's loss), but not really understand what the person may be going through.

Hmmm. Not a dead horse, maybe only wounded lol! I did some Googling around after reading your post, and I now believe the issue is as clear as mud. Examples for one are sometimes used for the other. Opinions on why sympathy is bad and empathy is good followed by opinions as to why one might want to use sympathy rather than empathy. But the prevailing definitions are the ones you used above, so I think we're looking at the same sites!

I think I'll just leave this with whatever the heck I've been doing all these years seems to be working, no one has ever asked me to use a more empathetic or sympathetic approach. I'm sorry that doesn't much help the OP (sympathy for her? empathy??). Good luck! :)

FolksBtrippin, BSN, RN · Mar 13, 2017

This topic is important because for NCLEX, you need to understand the concepts the way your textbook is defining them.