Let me start off by saying that this post is not intended to offend/insult anyone! I want to hear peoples opinions and point of views on the matter, so PLEASE, do not have my head.
So, I have been reading quite a few post from nursing students who are now questioning if nursing is for them. Those questions are not based on their grades, its based on their experiences in the clinical sites. Some are grossed out by what they have seen, others claim they didn't think it would be like that, and more than a few don't think they are cut out for It, and do not have the patience to deal with "difficult" patients.
So this is my question; should nurses be required to be a CNA (for at least 3 months) before they enter the field of nursing?
Please remember, this is only a question not a recommendation in anyway. I am really curious because I have seen people spend all that money only to drop out because once exposed to the reality of nursing they find out that its not something they can handle. Also, it would prevent them from wasting their money, and or preventing other prospective students from getting into the program who would really love the nursing profession.
I wi say for me, it helped me understanding what diseases looked like, how to manage time management, handle high pt loads, and collaborate with the healthcare team-to add I worked in an ER and on a Tele floor, so those were high acuity settings where communication was key.
I think that for some people, it does help them become familiar with the healthcare setting; I think if people have an aversion to touching people, vomit, poop, and all that stuff, I think that it would give someone a chance to figure out if they want to endure more of this while in a nursing program.
I'm more in the camp that if it needs to be a requirement, then clinical time needs to have a transition period where there is more time learning the role of a nurse, and emphasizing leadership time, shadowing a Charge Nurse, and act as a Charge nurse with ones nursing peers-I was able to do this in my PN and BSN program; it helped me tremendously when I held leadership positions.
It might be a good idea to make it required. It might make sense because then the actually RN program might be slightly shorter. In my program the first 16 weeks was essentially learning PCT/CNA/NA training.
Specializes in Cath/EP lab, CCU, Cardiac stepdown.
It might be a good idea to make it required. It might make sense because then the actually RN program might be slightly shorter. In my program the first 16 weeks was essentially learning PCT/CNA/NA training.
It seems to me that your program was just too long. 16 weeks of cna training is ridiculous. It's a rn not cna program. You should be learning rn things. As someone else said, if you were to get experience, would it not be better to get rn experience, since that is your field.
In my fundamentals lecture we learned about rn things and had SOME cna tasks incorporated. In our fundamentals clinical, we had to do adls, v/s, bed change, etc, and then we still did our assessments, care plans, medications, and therapeutic communication skills.
I personally feel that having to be a cna as a requirement is not necessary, helpful but not required. My school was able to train us to be a rn and had us learn what cna did at the same time. To focus entirely on cna training in a rn program, or even have it as a prerequisite is inefficient. I love my cnas and they're great but the focus is to be a rn not a cna.
I don't think the purpose of the CNA is to teach you how to be a nurse, or give you nursing experience or anything else prior to nursing school. It's to get you over that hurdle of HOLY CRAP I HAVE TO TOUCH PEOPLE as a brand new nurse coming into clinical. When you step foot on that hospital floor for the first time in clinical, you aren't making complex nursing decisions. You are doing basic care. Sure, you may pass a med - but I was responsible for total care of my patients. I am not sure I would want to attend a nursing school where the little tasks (which are sometimes the big tasks) aren't worthy of proper instruction.
Specializes in Cath/EP lab, CCU, Cardiac stepdown.
I don't think the purpose of the CNA is to teach you how to be a nurse, or give you nursing experience or anything else prior to nursing school. It's to get you over that hurdle of HOLY CRAP I HAVE TO TOUCH PEOPLE as a brand new nurse coming into clinical. When you step foot on that hospital floor for the first time in clinical, you aren't making complex nursing decisions. You are doing basic care. Sure, you may pass a med - but I was responsible for total care of my patients. I am not sure I would want to attend a nursing school where the little tasks (which are sometimes the big tasks) aren't worthy of proper instruction.
Exactly, to be a cna to get instruction on "touching" patients and communicating with them is not time well spent. Will it get the job done? Yes, but it is not a good way to do so. First semester clinicals, at least mine, teaches you how to communicate and carry out total care for patients while still teaching rn things. To require students to be a cna would not be the best way nor the most time/money efficient way to go about it.
Specializes in Medical-Surgical/Float Pool/Stepdown.
My two cents: if you are going to require students do an additional 3 months to gain experience I would much prefer it be in the RN role rather than CNA role.
Sent from my iPhone.
But what if the whole purpose of requiring students to be a working and licenced CNA prior to nursing school, particularly nursing fundamentals, was to devote more time to learning about the basics of nursing instead of this time being devoted to CNA skills that non-CNA nursing students may have been wasting a whole semester on learning? (Especially so since CNA work is basic nursing care such as bathing and toileting patients of all ages) This is what my school did when it changed the requirement for all entering nursing students to be licenced CNA's and they tweaked their curriculum to reflect the changes. This also ensured that the student already had passed their background checks and TB tests. Other benefits have to do with already having exposure to patients and bodily fluids. So much is crammed into the curriculum already, this can open up more time for subjects such as pharmacology and math that IMHO should be subjects that students should be more solid/comfortable with by graduation. Besides, a lot of areas offer free CNA classes through places like the Adult Ed. They tend to have strict attendance policies that can weed out students that aren't ready for the real commitment of nursing school...which can take away from other students lecture/clinical time until they get kicked out or drop.
I worked as a CNA for a year and a half prior to graduating and becoming a full fledged RN. I have to say that exposing yourself to a nursing environment and becoming familiar with it is an eye opening experience. Surely enough, being an RN and CNA are two completely different things, but the experience that comes with being a CNA prior to an RN is vital. Pre-requisite material, I don't think so, but I think that it's a great, great idea to expose yourself to the world of nursing, become familiar with patient interactions, and how the flow of a nursing unit operates. I'm just a nooby RN, but I still appreciate my time as a CNA. It certainly makes you appreciate your fellow CNA's working with you. I don't forget where I come from. It really irritates me when people become RN's and have to deal with an incontinent patient and say "this is what the CNA's are for," or something to that extent. No, you are an RN as well and this is just as much your responsibility as the CNA's. Pardon the small side rant. But Do I think they need to do this? No, not really, but would be super beneficial to learn about the job a little and learn about his or herself.
I want to point out that I keep seeing people in this thread say 'licensed' CNA or 'CNA license'. Becoming a CNA does not grant one a license. It is a certification.
Working as a CNA gives a TON of insight into the world that is nursing. From seeing what nurses do all day to working directly with patients, the experience is invaluable.
Specializes in Cath/EP lab, CCU, Cardiac stepdown.
YES!
Working as a CNA gives a TON of insight into the world that is nursing. From seeing what nurses do all day to working directly with patients, the experience is invaluable.
But you can get insight of the nursing work in nursing school.
Specializes in Med nurse in med-surg., float, HH, and PDN.
But you can get insight of the nursing work in nursing school.
But it's like seeing a photograph of someone vs meeting them face to face. The photograph may be revealing, but not as revealing as seeing that person moving, talking and observing their demeanor and personality. A photo seldom captures those aspects.
.thumb.jpg.5d8fa9b66c1daee6d7d146447daa5c26.jpg){kind=small}
LadyFree28, BSN, LPN, RN
8,429 Posts
Hmm..
I was a nurse tech, LPN, now an RN.
I wi say for me, it helped me understanding what diseases looked like, how to manage time management, handle high pt loads, and collaborate with the healthcare team-to add I worked in an ER and on a Tele floor, so those were high acuity settings where communication was key.
I think that for some people, it does help them become familiar with the healthcare setting; I think if people have an aversion to touching people, vomit, poop, and all that stuff, I think that it would give someone a chance to figure out if they want to endure more of this while in a nursing program.
I'm more in the camp that if it needs to be a requirement, then clinical time needs to have a transition period where there is more time learning the role of a nurse, and emphasizing leadership time, shadowing a Charge Nurse, and act as a Charge nurse with ones nursing peers-I was able to do this in my PN and BSN program; it helped me tremendously when I held leadership positions.