Is it true that a BSN will be mandatory soon?

Published

An instructor of mine (I'm in another state) stated that she recently went to a national educators conference and that they were saying that within the next several years in NY it would be mandatory to have your BSN. Does anyone know anything about this? Thanks

thank you for considering us lonely often left out of the loop lvn's

i certainly don't consider lpns/lvns out of the loop at all. i work primarily with lpns, so i know they do a great job. in fact, i am starting lpn school next month, and i want to continue working in the geriatric area. the lpns i know are very smart, and they take good care of the residents.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Community Health, Med-Surg, Home Health.
I certainly don't consider LPNs/LVNs out of the loop at all. I work primarily with LPNs, so I know they do a great job. In fact, I am starting LPN school next month, and I want to continue working in the geriatric area. The LPNs I know are very smart, and they take good care of the residents.

There are some RNs that do not consider us to be nurses no matter how positively we influence patient care. While that alone does not offend me as much, I find that those that know the least suddenly decide to take advantage of an LPN that is smart. I have seen nurses on all levels make fundamental blunders and it has made me wonder how on earth they obtained their licenses and even degrees. I think one of my issues is that I have seen many move up the ladder and it has not changed their negative ethics and still cause harm to the patients as well as toxic to the workplace.

Irregardless of what, I do the best that I can to care for the patients I serve and be a supportive team player to all people in the medical profession. Thanks for acknowledging our contribution to patient care. :yeah:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Then there's the argument that BSNs are more likely to leave the bedside.

I don't think this is a powerful argument against requiring a BSN as the entry point for nursing. In my area, at least, to get hired on as nursing faculty, you have to have a Masters, even for the ADN programs. If you want to be hired on for LVN faculty or EMT/paramedic faculty, you have to have a BSN, but be enrolled in grad school with at least 18-20 credit hours already complete. Most of the hospitals around here want DONs with masters or PHDs, even for long-term care facilities. And the majority of hospitals promote from within for their management positions, and if the staff doesn't already have the appropriate education, works to help that individual achieve it after/during the promotion. There aren't a lot of opportunities outside of bedside nursing for a BSN nurse. Even things like Infection control, case management, public health nurses - at least in my nearby area - want either graduate work, Master's degrees, or about 15 years of experience. So, not something easily obtained by the average BSN nurse.

There have been several posts that have suggested that the BSN be done away with and that the ADN be considered to be the entry point into nursing. I think that's a horrible idea - for one thing, it would invalidate every BSN already out there. It wouldn't be like grandfathering in the people with an ADN, thus advancing them because how do you grandfather in something more advanced than what's required? And for another, I think it would be a HUGE turn off to a lot of people. You worry that requiring a BSN will deprive the profession of new people and worsen the shortage? I imagine that requiring an ADN would do the same thing. I *never* would have gone into nursing if it would have required me to get an associates degree. That's just not something I wanted to pursue.

My BSN program - and admittedly I went to 2 different programs because I got homesick and transferred when I was halfway through - but I did get quite a few courses on professional development, management, ethics, and legal issues. I have found those things quite beneficial in my practice. None of the ADN programs around here offer anything remotely similar.

Perhaps if nurses could all get behind the idea of standardizing the entry point into nursing, we could get behind the idea of standardizing nursing education, too, and decide for ourselves what is important to be taught in nursing school ... and what is a lot of fluff. But as long as we keep bickering ... and trying to keep nursing the most poorly educated of all health care professionals ... other people and professions will keep making all the important decisions for us.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
I don't think this is a powerful argument against requiring a BSN as the entry point for nursing. In my area, at least, to get hired on as nursing faculty, you have to have a Masters, even for the ADN programs. If you want to be hired on for LVN faculty or EMT/paramedic faculty, you have to have a BSN, but be enrolled in grad school with at least 18-20 credit hours already complete. Most of the hospitals around here want DONs with masters or PHDs, even for long-term care facilities. And the majority of hospitals promote from within for their management positions, and if the staff doesn't already have the appropriate education, works to help that individual achieve it after/during the promotion. There aren't a lot of opportunities outside of bedside nursing for a BSN nurse. Even things like Infection control, case management, public health nurses - at least in my nearby area - want either graduate work, Master's degrees, or about 15 years of experience. So, not something easily obtained by the average BSN nurse.

There have been several posts that have suggested that the BSN be done away with and that the ADN be considered to be the entry point into nursing. I think that's a horrible idea - for one thing, it would invalidate every BSN already out there. It wouldn't be like grandfathering in the people with an ADN, thus advancing them because how do you grandfather in something more advanced than what's required? And for another, I think it would be a HUGE turn off to a lot of people. You worry that requiring a BSN will deprive the profession of new people and worsen the shortage? I imagine that requiring an ADN would do the same thing. I *never* would have gone into nursing if it would have required me to get an associates degree. That's just not something I wanted to pursue.

My BSN program - and admittedly I went to 2 different programs because I got homesick and transferred when I was halfway through - but I did get quite a few courses on professional development, management, ethics, and legal issues. I have found those things quite beneficial in my practice. None of the ADN programs around here offer anything remotely similar.

Perhaps if nurses could all get behind the idea of standardizing the entry point into nursing, we could get behind the idea of standardizing nursing education, too, and decide for ourselves what is important to be taught in nursing school ... and what is a lot of fluff. But as long as we keep bickering ... and trying to keep nursing the most poorly educated of all health care professionals ... other people and professions will keep making all the important decisions for us.

AMEN!!!!

Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN

Spokane, Washingnton

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Critical Care.
Perhaps if nurses could all get behind the idea of standardizing the entry point into nursing, we could get behind the idea of standardizing nursing education, too, and decide for ourselves what is important to be taught in nursing school ... and what is a lot of fluff.

This argument is a non-sequitur. It doesn't lend itself that BSN should Be that standardized point of entry. This is especially true in that ADN programs have been putting out exceptional nurses for five decades now. I'm not arguing that ADN should be THE standard point of entry. I'm arguing that if YOU wish to push a standard point of entry, BSN is not necessarily the best case argument for such a point of entry. The ASSUMPTION that this argument lends itself to BSN is merely an inherent case of BSN-bias on your part.

The only way this argument has merit, on it's own, is if you are suggesting that anything less than BSN is inferior. In THAT case, you have just lost your argument.

The ONLY way BSN will EVER become a 'standard point of entry' is if all stakeholders are brought along. You can't diss the majority of those stakeholders and then expect them to come to this table. THAT is why this issue has gone exactly NOWHERE in four decades and will not go anywhere in the next four decades.

BSN proponents have been making this argument that there must be a 'standard' point of entry, for years. Very few ADN propopents have agreed with this. However. When it is pointed out that ADN would equally suffice as that point of entry, you rebel against the idea! How dare - do you know what that would mean for BSN!!!!! Well, do YOU know what that would mean for ADNs? This is YOUR argument - standard entry. If you would be offended if that standardization wouldn't support YOUR degree, how on earth do you expect those that you would disenfranchise with this POV to NOT also be offended? You can't. Your response to a proposal to exclude YOUR degree is met with stiff resistance on your part. Then you turn around and argue that shouldn't be the case for others. ON ITS FACE, 'standard entry' is an offensive argument, precisely because it's an exclusionary argument.

There are better reasons to argue for BSN-entry than to argue some arbitrary need to 'standardize'. 50 yrs of real-world practice with differentiated degree paths offer substantial refutation to this theoretical argument.

I'm not against BSN-entry. I'm against arguments in favor of BSN-entry that are disrespectful of all stakeholders. Those arguments are counter-productive in that they prevent those stakeholders from being able to reach a consensus that protects the interests of everybody that should be at this decision table. "BSN is better than you - na na!" is just not a good selling point to BSN entry to practice.

~faith,

Timothy.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
No. That means that LPNs should increase their entry into practice to an Associates Degree, along with RNs increasing their entry into practice to a BSN. Spare me the sob stories about the single welfare mothers who need a "quick" education to get into the working world to bring them out of poverty, yada yada yada. Nursing does not need to be the "welfare" of health care professions. We are paid, and compensated as such. Along with our image that the public has of us.

Most of the public thinks that nursing is nothing more than "on the job training" and requires little if any college education. I don't care the public thinks that we are wonderful They think we are wonderful because we are stupid enough to work for as little as we do, have no power, and we are pushed around by everyone in the hospital, (as evidenced by the stories here about getting no support from supervisors in enforcing visiting hours). They think that we are just uneducated "doctor helpers".

That image will never change until we raise ourselves to the standards of other health care professionals. Nurses are a dime a dozen, and are used as interchangeable "widgets". We allow our professional practice to be sold to the highest bidder. We allow our professional practice to be "de professiononalized". "Anybody can be a nurse". Just put on scrubs and go to it.

Is that what you want nursings image to be? That is what is being sold to the public by the hospitals. If they had their way, they would de- professionalize the entire professional practice of an RN and hire high school dropouts to fill our jobs. We enable them to accomplish this by not pushing for higher educational levals for nursing. The publics sees little differance in the differant education levels that we have. Not much separates most nurses from blue collar jobs that can be had with a short educational path. One year for an LPN, two years for as Associates Degree and off you go to work? 6 months of OJT for a Medical Assistant?

We have no one to blame but ourselves for this entire mess. JMHO and my NY $0.02.

Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN

Spokane, Washington

I AM a single mother(AND PROUD OF IT!!!) who worked my way up from CNA to RN after 13 years of being a CNA. And yes! i am one of the less- educated who ONLY has her two year degree! It's not the "title" in which you have on paper, but the attitude and compassion for people which makes you a good nurse. Everybody has a purpose and a job and in order to do that job effectively, we must RESPECT others and their responsibilites. You have lpns whom are just as capable of taking care of pt's as a RN. Without CNA's that pt that you needed a stat bp on down the hall while you were on the phone with the MD will go unchecked. Even the lowly housekeeper(and yes they do need a high school diploma ) is important because that bed you need for the new admission in ED is not cleaned, then guess who has to do it!!! You got it, the RN ADN,BSN,MSN and all.

All it takes for you to "lose" your title is one mistake, or complaint to your BON about you... Then you too will have to work at your local Walmart along with all the other non-educated people to take care of yourself and your family.

You sound very angry in your post , and my response to you although i'm offended by what you have said is not meant to be angry towards you.... simply put one must be careful what generalizations about people. In this time of foreclosures,and bankrupts, ANYjob is good. I do agree with you that we are misunderstood and at times mistreated by management, but i can't see doing anything other than being a nurse,it's a calling NOT A JOB!:twocents:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
This argument is a non-sequitur. It doesn't lend itself that BSN should Be that standardized point of entry. This is especially true in that ADN programs have been putting out exceptional nurses for five decades now. I'm not arguing that ADN should be THE standard point of entry. I'm arguing that if YOU wish to push a standard point of entry, BSN is not necessarily the best case argument for such a point of entry. The ASSUMPTION that this argument lends itself to BSN is merely an inherent case of BSN-bias on your part.

The only way this argument has merit, on it's own, is if you are suggesting that anything less than BSN is inferior. In THAT case, you have just lost your argument.

The ONLY way BSN will EVER become a 'standard point of entry' is if all stakeholders are brought along. You can't diss the majority of those stakeholders and then expect them to come to this table. THAT is why this issue has gone exactly NOWHERE in four decades and will not go anywhere in the next four decades.

BSN proponents have been making this argument that there must be a 'standard' point of entry, for years. Very few ADN propopents have agreed with this. However. When it is pointed out that ADN would equally suffice as that point of entry, you rebel against the idea! How dare - do you know what that would mean for BSN!!!!! Well, do YOU know what that would mean for ADNs? This is YOUR argument - standard entry. If you would be offended if that standardization wouldn't support YOUR degree, how on earth do you expect those that you would disenfranchise with this POV to NOT also be offended? You can't. Your response to a proposal to exclude YOUR degree is met with stiff resistance on your part. Then you turn around and argue that shouldn't be the case for others. ON ITS FACE, 'standard entry' is an offensive argument, precisely because it's an exclusionary argument.

There are better reasons to argue for BSN-entry than to argue some arbitrary need to 'standardize'. 50 yrs of real-world practice with differentiated degree paths offer substantial refutation to this theoretical argument.

I'm not against BSN-entry. I'm against arguments if favor of BSN-entry that are disrespectful of all stakeholders. Those arguments are counter-productive in that they prevent those stakeholders from being able to reach a consensus that protects the interests of everybody that should be at this decision table. "BSN is better than you - na na!" is just not a good selling point to BSN entry to practice.

~faith,

Timothy.

I agree with you totally, a nurse is a nurse it doesn't matter whether you have a BSN or a ADN what matters is whats in your heart; that will determine how good of a nurse a person will be.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Stroke/Neuro.

We all take the same NCLEX correct????? Enough said.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.

There have been several posts that have suggested that the BSN be done away with and that the ADN be considered to be the entry point into nursing. I think that's a horrible idea - for one thing, it would invalidate every BSN already out there. It wouldn't be like grandfathering in the people with an ADN, thus advancing them because how do you grandfather in something more advanced than what's required?

*** I don't consider an RN who happens to have a BSN to be advanced relative to a RN with an ADN. It might invalidate the BSN but the BSN degree is starting to look pretty obsolete to me anyway. I got one, didn't learn a thing , except maybe how to better write papers. I don't see myself as having advanced, more like a backslide. Now I owe money but don't make any more money.

And for another, I think it would be a HUGE turn off to a lot of people. You worry that requiring a BSN will deprive the profession of new people and worsen the shortage?

*** Well it was my idea but I do NOT worry about worsening the "shortage". I don't believ such a thing exists.

I imagine that requiring an ADN would do the same thing.

*** Oh absolutely it would but it wouldn't be as bad, those turned off by the required ADN would be less of a loss to the profession than those turned off by the BSN, IMO.

My BSN program - and admittedly I went to 2 different programs because I got homesick and transferred when I was halfway through - but I did get quite a few courses on professional development, management, ethics, and legal issues. I have found those things quite beneficial in my practice. None of the ADN programs around here offer anything remotely similar.

*** My ADN program included those things but admittedly not in depth. My BSN did not cover those things and I got it from a state university. It would have been helpful had they done so but they didn't.

Perhaps if nurses could all get behind the idea of standardizing the entry point into nursing, we could get behind the idea of standardizing nursing education, too, and decide for ourselves what is important to be taught in nursing school

*** I think a far better idea would be to get rid of the fluff and make the BSN part of all programs be useful information. Then maybe there would be more interest in getting a BSN.

... and what is a lot of fluff. But as long as we keep bickering

*** Hey, for the most part it's not the ADN nurses calling for the BSN standard, thus causing bickering.

... and trying to keep nursing the most poorly educated of all health care professionals

*** I reject the premise of your statement. Holding a BSN does not make one more "educated". I wonder how many ADN nurses hold degrees in other fields? I suspect it is a large percentage. I also think that requiring a bachelors degree, but necessarily a BSN would result in less resistance.

In my opinion we should do one of two things. Either standardize entry to practice on the ADN or make the sole entry point a two year masters program with a bachelors degree in another field a pre-requisite. Like how most PA programs are doing.

... other people and professions will keep making all the important decisions for us.

*** The profession that are allowed to bill for their service you mean. To me THAT is the real difference.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I googled the word "professional" and found the following criteria listed in the definition... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional

Therefore it would be appropriate to state that a 'true' professional must be proficient in all criteria for the field of work they are practising professionally in. Criteria include following:

  1. The highest academic qualifications - i.e., university college/institute
  2. Expert and specialised knowledge in field which one is practising professionally
  3. Excellent manual/practical & literary skills in relation to profession
  4. High quality work in (examples): creations, products, services, presentations, consultancy, primary/other research, administrative, marketing or other work endeavours
  5. A high standard of professional ethics, behaviour and work activities while carrying out one's profession (as an employee, self-employed person, career, enterprise, business, company, or partnership/associate/colleague, etc.)

Once again, a PROFESSIONAL is someone who has a minimum of a Bachelor's degree. Although, I suppose we can have 2 types of R.N.'s...the ADN's will be the "vocational nurses" and the BSN's will be the "professional nurses." Do you know of any other professional who isn't required to have a minimum of a bachelor's degree?

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Telemetry/Med Surg.

As I mentioned before, perhaps I should look into my State BON practices because my license states Professional Nurse and I'm a 3-year diploma grad. Oh the horrors of it all.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
I reject the premise of your statement. Holding a BSN does not make one more "educated". I wonder how many ADN nurses hold degrees in other fields? I suspect it is a large percentage. I also think that requiring a bachelors degree, but necessarily a BSN would result in less resistance.

In my opinion we should do one of two things. Either standardize entry to practice on the ADN or make the sole entry point a two year masters program with a bachelors degree in another field a pre-requisite. Like how most PA programs are doing.

Perhaps in some ways this is an excellent idea - if the ADN's bachelor's degree is in something that would correspond or be useful in nursing. But if the ADN's bachelor's degree was in ... quantum physics or 19th century French poetry or something like that, it would perhaps not be that beneficial in the profession of nursing. The benefit of a BSN is that the emphasis of the undergraduate education is on science.

If you had deficits in your BSN program, then that's unfortunate, but that's exactly the type of thing that I'm talking about. When nurses are fighting each other, of course we're not going to be able to manage to make any major decisions about thinks like our own course content. So of course some administrative yahoo is going to decide for us what is and is not important to be taught.

That is the kind of thing that could be changed and standardized, IF nurses could get behind the idea of a standardized entry point for education.

BSN proponents have been making this argument that there must be a 'standard' point of entry, for years. Very few ADN propopents have agreed with this. However. When it is pointed out that ADN would equally suffice as that point of entry, you rebel against the idea! How dare - do you know what that would mean for BSN!!!!! Well, do YOU know what that would mean for ADNs? This is YOUR argument - standard entry. If you would be offended if that standardization wouldn't support YOUR degree, how on earth do you expect those that you would disenfranchise with this POV to NOT also be offended? You can't. Your response to a proposal to exclude YOUR degree is met with stiff resistance on your part.

That's because turning around and requiring an ADN would totally ivalidate those who already have a BSN. It would simply eliminate their degree. It would not be like those who have an ADN now, who get grandfathered in to a more advanced degree. Whether or not you feel like you get more education with a bachelor's, the fact remains that the general path of education is associates, followed by bachelors, to masters, to PhD. Not Bachelors, back to associates degree. That's a step *backwards* on the educational path. Rather than improving the educational requirements for nurses to put us on par with all the other health care professionals out there, it would be putting us backwards and again, making us have the LOWEST educational requirement out there.

And that seems very sad to me, because we have the highest level of responsibility. Lowest education = highest responsibility. Lowest level of education, highest level of responsibility, lowest pay. Something seems very, very off there.

One thing we as a profession have within our power to control and correct is our own educational requirements. Why not require a little more from nurses? Perhaps if we required a little more from ourselves as professionals, others would respect us a little more and accord us a little more as well.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion