So I am a first quarter nursing student, and I was talking to some of my classmates. One mentioned how, at clinical, an older nurse kept trying to talk her out of the profession, basically trashing the field. Her opinion. So we keep talking and one of the things that came up was floor nursing. EVERY SINGLE one of them said they didn't want to work on the floor/be a floor nurse!
I was shocked. ***** Why are you even trying to be a nurse if all you want to do is go straight to grad school to become a Nurse Practitioner (Peds)???? One of these girls was the same girl who talked about other students who had to be rushed into the emergency room during clinical, saying they had no place in nursing school.
Maybe it is because I work as a "sitter"/safety care associate and am use to the "dirty working" (i.e. I had to hold a man's member in a urinary because he was in restraints last week).
Am I the only one who has a bad taste in their mouths? Many of these are little girls barely out of high school who have never worked or volunteered a day in their lives at a hospital. I would hate to have a nurse who hated her job and only did it so she could get accepted into grad school.
They will be in for a rude awakening when they realize that most *decent* grad schools aren't going to bother looking at an applicant with 0 or the bare minimum floor experience, and I hope they wouldn't look at someone who has less than two years of work experience on the floor. I see most of the nursing students who say they don't want to work on the floor leaving the profession entirely within the first five years (and I'm being generous)...what do you think?
The inherent and unstated truth in that assessment is that human beings are inherently ****birds, of selfish, self-indulgent and uncaring natures.
Or, to restate, it completely validates PB's point- if these individuals are unable to develop self-assessing and externally focused perspectives, they should not have primary care responsibility. Assuming that we assign advanced practice to the higher level of self-actualization(my opinion is that we must)...
No, it could mean nothing more than the fact that we all have limited time and resources and want the most efficient path to the goal. If the "system" supports this rush to acquire a particular title, then even people who are otherwise conscientious might not see the inherent problems in having limited clinical time or job experience.
Human nature is a little self-serving. That doesn't mean people who want to go straight for the NP are inherently evil. It only means that the powers that be should get some collective scrutiny to make sure they're not just playing to the element of human nature that wants the biggest bang for its buck and wants it now.
All that said, NP candidates with no significant nursing background ought to understand that not only are their future patients being short-changed--they are being cheated as well. Until they have some experience under their belts--whether it's before or after they acquire the NP title--there will be a certain amount of disconnect between book/theoretical learning and real world practice. That's the nature of the beast.
I tend to agree, I left the program after the first week d/t cancer, but the truth is, I would have probably left anyway.....1500 dollars per credit hour
I tend to agree, I left the program after the first week d/t cancer, but the truth is, I would have probably left anyway.....1500 dollars per credit hour
So if someone who is not a nurse decides being a Nurse Practitioner is his or her career goal, how do you suggest that individual get there? Being a RN is a prerequisite to NP school, but you think it is wrong to become a RN to become a NP? I'm not following the logic here...
I am in nursing school right now to become a RN. I know for sure I want to continue on to be a NP. Does that mean I will be a bad floor nurse? I hope not! I intend to be the best darn RN I can be and learn as much as I possibly can to help me out in NP school and in my future career as a NP.
And yes, there are programs that allow non-nurses with non-nursing bachelors degrees become NPs in 3 years. It is scary? I think so. However, I know graduates of a program in my city and they are all considered to be amazing RNs by their coworkers, so maybe there is something in it I do not know. Personally, I tend to get 1-2 years floor nursing experience as a RN first because, as I said, the concept scares me.
Who said RN wanting to become NP made bad floor nurse? Where did that come from? You got it backwards. Point is that you cant become an advanced practice nurse without practicing nursing! Well, many programs will accept your money but I wouldnt hire you.
Very kind of you to ask :) I am doing great. Cancer was caught early and I am 1 year and 2 mos post surg. No chemo or radiation was needed. I am nearing the completion of my third out of four semesters in my local ADN program.
Really loving clinicals and my clients (many call them patients). I have 2 more big tests and 2 really big cummulative finals coming up and I am out of gas so I hope I can get by lol.
But life is good :) Being a patient and having to grapple with a diagnosis of CA really gave me some perspective and will certainly make me a more compassionate nurse.
Specializes in Infectious Disease, Neuro, Research.
No, it could mean nothing more than the fact that we all have limited time and resources and want the most efficient path to the goal. If the "system" supports this rush to acquire a particular title, then even people who are otherwise conscientious might not see the inherent problems in having limited clinical time or job experience.
Human nature is a little self-serving. That doesn't mean people who want to go straight for the NP are inherently evil. It only means that the powers that be should get some collective scrutiny to make sure they're not just playing to the element of human nature that wants the biggest bang for its buck and wants it now.
All that said, NP candidates with no significant nursing background ought to understand that not only are their future patients being short-changed--they are being cheated as well. Until they have some experience under their belts--whether it's before or after they acquire the NP title--there will be a certain amount of disconnect between book/theoretical learning and real world practice. That's the nature of the beast.
In part, my statement was a round-about reference to another discussion mindlor & I had on psychology vs. sociology, tho' perhaps I was a bit obscure.
Bureaucracy, by nature, seeks out and rewards the LCD (Lowest Common Denominator). In this way, "The Unit" (or Agency/College of___/whatever)is able to acrue volume and increasing its authority by that volume. Profound outliers at the low end(those that aren't sure that it isn't okay to eat off a toilet seat) are shuttled around in the system, because if they are disciplined, The Unit must examine how such a member was inducted (i.e., introspection). The Unit has no desire to do that- many people would be fired.
Outliers at the high end (those who excel) will be terminated for the same reason- by nature they demand superior performance, and as The Unit is a model of status quo, high-performers make The Unit appear dysfunctional (which it, in fact, is).
The point of this is, the powers that be, will never evolve into higher standards, unless there is profound, painful stimulus to do so. The onus, therefore, is on the individual to be self-assessing enough to demand a higher standard- if they do not (as is being discussed), inherently, they are intellectually, if not morally, unqualified for the responsibility they seek. One may be an MBA with limited capacity, and, statistically, at worst, one my collapse 1,000-2,000 jobs within the market. This is fairly self-correcting, as business, left to itself, allows dysfunctional units to die, and absorbs the residuals back into the market. An AP with limited capacity is profoundly more dangerous in their capacity to waste/eliminate resources within the family structure and community, and their social capacity in education and legislation- as they will rise to leadership positions based on degree, not on ability. (Another debate, but true, nonetheless- the Peter Principle)
Again, for those reading- if you recognize the weaknesses in the current model, and you are doing your best to mitigate the low standard forced upon you, this does not apply.
Who said RN wanting to become NP made bad floor nurse? Where did that come from? You got it backwards. Point is that you cant become an advanced practice nurse without practicing nursing! Well, many programs will accept your money but I wouldnt hire you.
I got that feeling from the OP who stated
"VERY SINGLE one of them said they didn't want to work on the floor/be a floor nurse!" and "I would hate to have a nurse who hated her job and only did it so she could get accepted into grad school" and "I see most of the nursing students who say they don't want to work on the floor leaving the profession entirely within the first five years (and I'm being generous)."
I was looking at this cockeyed. I get what OP says but i also know that talk is cheap and that youth and inexperience can make one say stupid things. I believe that very few of these snobs will actually accomplish anything. Costs, debt, pregnancies, growing disenchanted with your field and lack of time all conspire against us. A few of the highly motivated will get through advanced degrees and a few of those will be fools, most will be fine and a few will put me to shame.
Specializes in Infectious Disease, Neuro, Research.
Hmmmm... if I was really that smart I'd have a doctorate, tho'. I lack(ed) the intestinal fortitude to say the right things, turn in useless papers, and jump the hoops. "I'm get-tin' bettah tho'..." for the Monty Python fans. I'll probably start checking into the Accelerated BSN before too long. Gag!
I hear you brother Rob. I really hate the nonsensical crap that is required by academia....makes me sick. if it were useful it would be one thing, but for the most part it is busy work that they can whip out and show the accredidation agencies when they happen to drop by....
Specializes in Infectious Disease, Neuro, Research.
I was looking at this cockeyed. I get what OP says but i also know that talk is cheap and that youth and inexperience can make one say stupid things. I believe that very few of these snobs will actually accomplish anything. Costs, debt, pregnancies, growing disenchanted with your field and lack of time all conspire against us. A few of the highly motivated will get through advanced degrees and a few of those will be fools, most will be fine and a few will put me to shame.
Generally, I would agree with you. That level of performance does weed out the narcissists, by and large. I see a much larger problem with the self-indulgent attitude coming out of the undergrad programs- which is part of the problem with the flooded job market.
The perceived prestige and money in Nursing draws many for ,ah, questionable reasons, at best (this is validated by turn-over rates, whether you believe the good leave because of the bad, or the bad because they are unable to achieve their self-fulfilling goals in a care-delivery model, or some mixed-model). Directly, it is the call of SCARF(see below).
I'm clipping this from a friend's blog:
Amygdala Hijackings, Narcissism, and Social Consequences
Because the brain evolved during a time period in which physical dangers to life and limb were far more common than they are today, there are situations in which the HPA axis may prove to create some reactions that are maladaptive where modern life is concerned. Daniel Goleman, the somewhat controversial author of Emotional Intelligence and popularizer of related concepts, coined the term "amygdala hijacking" to refer to a situation in which a given environmental stress has (in Goleman's normal context) been misdiagnosed by the ancient fight-or-flight system, leading to a socially inappropriate response.
As we discussed in a previous post, a number of non-life threatening threats can still be placed in the fight-or-flight response category; the acronym SCARF---Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness, Fairness---has been used to describe social threat triggers that can reliably generate adrenal dumps and cause unpleasant emotions to cascade. When threatened by a SCARF attack in a social environment, the amygdala-modulated survival reaction may actually serve to make things worse by either: A)dramatically escalating the confrontation; or B) forcing the subject to endure continued adrenal stress reactions without recourse to any solution.
There appears to be a certain type of competitive and aggressive human being who learns about SCARF relatively early in life and who develops a social skillset based around using these threats to control resources. Researchers have observed that some young children, typically showing signs of narcissism, learn to manipulate others by using SCARF attacks. For examples, consider the potential impact of kicking another little girl out of the clique one day for some made-up transgression (attack on Relatedness); using public ridicule, usually over appearance, to cause shame and humiliation (attack on Status); and forcing obedience to tightly-controlled fashion trends (attack on Autonomy).
However, this is only half of the story: children who use these tactics will also reward servile behavior by including a new child in the group, presenting compliments or gifts or invitations, and so on (note that Autonomy is rarely encouraged). Because the strategies shift to manipulate both positive and negative social emotions, the manipulative children are termed "bi-strategic controllers" and they are often praised by teachers for showing "leadership qualities".
Unfortunately, the situation seems to be getting much worse: average scores on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) screen have been steadily increasing over time (bi-strategic control tendencies are highly correlated with narcissism) and there is significant evidence that popular social networking sites can end up rewarding the core skills of the narcissist (aggressive self-promotion; tightly edited and lavishly photojournaled lifestyle descriptions designed to depict achievement, travel, wealth, popularity, and excitement; demanding a self-centered audience-performer relationship within the social network).
An equally troubling finding is that a disproportionate share of the increase in narcissism is concentrated in young girls. I am not a sociologist and tend to favor the reductionist and static view of human nature that is offered by evolutionary psychology, but I have to concede that there does appear to be a significant learned or cultural component to narcissism and that it is shaped by positive and negative feedback loops.
Findings are inconclusive and the research is very controversial, but for argument's sake we can say this: if there is indeed a strong gender-biased aspect to the overall trend of increasing narcissism, then this will have very serious long-term social ramifications in regards to dating norms, divorce rates (which will increase dramatically, thus creating an expectation of divorce among those who are considering marriage), and rates of childbirth.
This is part of a running series that can be summed up by calling it the "universal economics of life" (my terminology, not Bel's.)
(I'm not terribly bright, I just have the talent for seeking out extraordinary mentors!)
Specializes in Critical Care, ED, Cath lab, CTPAC,Trauma.
In part, my statement was a round-about reference to another discussion mindlor & I had on psychology vs. sociology, tho' perhaps I was a bit obscure.
Bureaucracy, by nature, seeks out and rewards the LCD (Lowest Common Denominator). In this way, "The Unit" (or Agency/College of___/whatever)is able to acrue volume and increasing its authority by that volume. Profound outliers at the low end(those that aren't sure that it isn't okay to eat off a toilet seat) are shuttled around in the system, because if they are disciplined, The Unit must examine how such a member was inducted (i.e., introspection). The Unit has no desire to do that- many people would be fired.
Outliers at the high end (those who excel) will be terminated for the same reason- by nature they demand superior performance, and as The Unit is a model of status quo, high-performers make The Unit appear dysfunctional (which it, in fact, is).
The point of this is, the powers that be, will never evolve into higher standards, unless there is profound, painful stimulus to do so. The onus, therefore, is on the individual to be self-assessing enough to demand a higher standard- if they do not (as is being discussed), inherently, they are intellectually, if not morally, unqualified for the responsibility they seek. One may be an MBA with limited capacity, and, statistically, at worst, one my collapse 1,000-2,000 jobs within the market. This is fairly self-correcting, as business, left to itself, allows dysfunctional units to die, and absorbs the residuals back into the market. An AP with limited capacity is profoundly more dangerous in their capacity to waste/eliminate resources within the family structure and community, and their social capacity in education and legislation- as they will rise to leadership positions based on degree, not on ability. (Another debate, but true, nonetheless- the Peter Principle)
Again, for those reading- if you recognize the weaknesses in the current model, and you are doing your best to mitigate the low standard forced upon you, this does not apply.
:bowingpur:bowingpur:bowingpur:bowingpur You have eloquently stated what I have been saying for years.....
BS, MS,PhD.......Bull ****, More of the Same, and Piled Higher and Deeper...
I lack(ed) the intestinal fortitude to say the right things, turn in useless papers, and jump the hoops. "I'm get-tin' bettah tho'..." for the Monty Python fans. I'll probably start checking into the 
rn/writer, RN
9 Articles; 4,168 Posts
No, it could mean nothing more than the fact that we all have limited time and resources and want the most efficient path to the goal. If the "system" supports this rush to acquire a particular title, then even people who are otherwise conscientious might not see the inherent problems in having limited clinical time or job experience.
Human nature is a little self-serving. That doesn't mean people who want to go straight for the NP are inherently evil. It only means that the powers that be should get some collective scrutiny to make sure they're not just playing to the element of human nature that wants the biggest bang for its buck and wants it now.
All that said, NP candidates with no significant nursing background ought to understand that not only are their future patients being short-changed--they are being cheated as well. Until they have some experience under their belts--whether it's before or after they acquire the NP title--there will be a certain amount of disconnect between book/theoretical learning and real world practice. That's the nature of the beast.