The ANA really doesn't like non-BSN Nurses

[SuesquatchRN]

When I was an LPN I was annoyed that I wasn't even included. NOW when I go to their site I see that the only nurses who can get credentialed for anything at all need a bachelor's, almost any bachelor's.

So where else can I get credentials for specialities prior to the BSN? I just don't hanve the money to do it now.

[flightnurse2b, LPN]

Is the only requirement to being called a nurse is that you provide useful patient care? Should the answer be let anyone who does any patient care in any capacity call themselves a nurse? Eliminate state boards and let the centers providing the patient care provide for the training and job descriptions of the staff. I have never said the LPNs have poorer judgement (other than choosing a profession that offers limited employment opportunities) but that they are not educated or licenced to provide the SAME care as an RN. What make one patient deserving of an RN caring for them and the next gets an LPN and just hopes that if something changes in thier condition the RN in charge has the time and ability to become involved. Perhaps in the LTC setting LPNs serve a more vital role but they are still limited by thier scope of practice in what interventions they can provide, and what assessments and decisions they are entitled to make. If I am ill enough to require care greater than that that my family can provide at home I think there is good reason to have an RN actively involved in my care 24/7. That aside, I want ALL RNs to have the same level of basic education to be called a nurse. If we determine as a profession that an AD is acceptable- so be it. People can quit wasting twice as much time in school to do the same job. Our professional organizations just need to take a leadership role and MAKE A DECISION and stick to it. If an ADN is the same "nurse" as a BSN then quit offering BSNs- it's cheating people. Part of the problem is some nurses see the job as a calling- like religious vows but with more sex, others see us as science trained professionals, arm in arm with our peers the physicians, still others see it as a job with some advanced training to perform certain tasks that have a higher level of skill than is found in a HS diploma. Until we can decide what a "nurse" is how can we expect hospitals, or the public to know. I personaly wouldn't be opposed to requiring a MSN to call yourself a nurse-that takes me out of the picture for now, but that is the minimal educational base for most occupations that call themselves "profession". This has been a debate since I was a student in the earily

1980s- lets decide before the 2080s.

ouch.

an LPN considered only a patient caregiver and an ADN a nurse is only a nurse in quotation marks.

that's why we live in america. because people of all backgrounds are able to get education, even if it is a vo-tech or associate's prepared degree/diploma, and still make a living. LPN and ADN programs open doors for people who would not have had the opportunity due to time, money, children, work schedule, etc. to get the BSN right off the bat. for me, it was out of reach. someday i will bridge. financially, at this time, i can't afford it.

i hope you do not treat your LPN and ADN coworkers with the same superiority you have implied in this post. part of the reason why there is no unity in this profession is that there is so much controversy within it. take a PhD RN and an LPN. put them side by side. what does the "N" still stand for? NURSE.

if you want to unify the profession of nursing with an entry level BSN, that's fine. but the way to do it is not by making LPN's and ADN's feel like their education, experience and knowledge mean nothing.

[cardiacRN2006, ADN, RN]

I don't intend to spend the time and money to get a BSN. I'm 51 years old and still raising children. I don't want to waste precious time writing meaningless 30 page careplans and writing fluff cultural diversity papers and other nonsense.

If BSN concentrated on hardcore clinically relavent material, then it would be valuable. I can further my knowledge base much better by going for a CCRN certification, or merely attending relavent seminars and reading nursing journals.

Gosh, in my first semester of my BSN I did a 20 page paper on sepsis and how my hospital fared within the guidelines set forth by the surviving sepsis campaign. Then I went to my manager and started to change what we do with septic patients, orders, protocols, etc.

I felt that the paper was worthwhile, as was what I learned and implemented.

And although I DO have to write a ton of papers (a ton!) I dont' consider them to be fluff-at all.

That being said, I'm glad I went the ADN route, as I would have never become a nurse if I had to do BSN first.

[SuesquatchRN, BSN, RN]

Gosh, in my first semester of my BSN I did a 20 page paper on sepsis and how my hospital fared within the guidelines set forth by the surviving sepsis campaign. Then I went to my manager and started to change what we do with septic patients, orders, protocols, etc.

I felt that the paper was worthwile, as was what I learned and implemented.

And although I DO have to write a ton of papers (a ton!) I dont' consider them to be fluff-at all.

That being said, I'm glad I went the ADN route, as I would have never become a nurse if I had to do BSN first.

Again, whether a program is "fluff" depends largely on the program. And nursing research is valuable.

[suanna]

ouch.

an LPN considered only a patient caregiver and an ADN a nurse is only a nurse in quotation marks.

that's why we live in america. because people of all backgrounds are able to get education, even if it is a vo-tech or associate's prepared degree/diploma, and still make a living. LPN and ADN programs open doors for people who would not have had the opportunity due to time, money, children, work schedule, etc. to get the BSN right off the bat. for me, it was out of reach. someday i will bridge. financially, at this time, i can't afford it.

i hope you do not treat your LPN and ADN coworkers with the same superiority you have implied in this post. part of the reason why there is no unity in this profession is that there is so much controversy within it. take a PhD RN and an LPN. put them side by side. what does the "N" still stand for? NURSE.

if you want to unify the profession of nursing with an entry level BSN, that's fine. but the way to do it is not by making LPN's and ADN's feel like their education, experience and knowledge mean nothing.

I apologise if I offended anyone of different educational of career choice backgrounds- that wasn't my intent. I don't understand your argument. The role of achieving the title "nurse" isn't a social service outreach program. Lots of people can't afford medical school but we don't invent a watered down low cost medical education just so those poor souls can be doctors too. It may be true that a 6 week first aid course would provide the basic skills needed to do routine office check-ups and well baby visits but I don't want that to become the standard to put out a shingle and claim to be a doctor. I bet HMOs would love to stop paying for those high priced med-school graduates-fortunately med school is still required to become a doctor of medicine. If you can't afford whatever the baseline educational standard is for becoming a nurse that is a separate issue from the fact that as a occupation we cannot decide among ourselves what a nurse is. I'm embarrassed that despite almost a century of organized licenced nursing we still cannot define the term "nurse". I know if we do decide on a basline educational standard for the title nurse- not everyone MAY be included that uses that title now. There may have to be accomodations made to define the title and role of indiviguals that don't have that baseling education but have skills we do not want to lose from the health care system. That has happened before in nursing- just ask the "sisters" that used to care for the hospilas sick before nursing became a state regulated, board certified occupation. They were the "nurses" before there was a state board with no more formal education than a well read catechism and a faith in the guiding hand of God (and a willingness to clean up other peoples poop). What was required of nursing exceeded thier educatin and skills so the state boards were established. What a nurse is expected to do and know today is so much more than even when I was in school 25years ago but we have made no accomodation in defining the term "nurse". I afraid nursing is losing respectability and diluting its voice. If we continue to make accomodations for any educational background to be called a nurse we will eventualy accomodate ourselves right out of a job.- WOW- sorry for the long post!

[RN1982]

if you want to unify the profession of nursing with an entry level BSN, that's fine. but the way to do it is not by making LPN's and ADN's feel like their education, experience and knowledge mean nothing.

I agree. What makes a BSN prepared nurse better than an ADN prepared nurse? 2 years of extra education? Give me a break. I'm not a second-class citizen because I chose to get an ADN first nor do I regret getting my ADN.

[lpnflorida, LPN]

Suanna,

I am hoping you are not as condescending as your above post is coming across to myself. Nurse/ social outreach program?

I believe you can make a good argument without being insulting to others in the field of nursing.

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

Suanna,

I am hoping you are not as condescending as your above post is coming across to myself. Nurse/ social outreach program?

I believe you can make a good argument without being insulting to others in the field of nursing.

It very very difficult not to step on toes when making this arguement. I didn't find Suanna's post that bad as some are taking it. It's only an opinion.

One can not advocate for the BSN to be the stardard without insulting a large group of people....it just can't be done and you're asking too much. People don't have to be belittling and condescending, but they still are going to step on toes. No way around it.

For example, I don't think anyone's put their case forward more respectful than the ANA's position, yet hundreds of thousands of nurses feel they are classified as 2nd class citizens and feel belittled and decline to join.

[Farmer Jane]

I absolutely think it is possible to advocate for BSN entry without making people feel bad.

We should advocate BSN entry because we want to elevate the profession, because we want to standardize, and because we want to increase the knowledge base of nurses.

Instead, the ANA talks about "technical" vs. "professional" nurses. It's insulting and unnecessary. What did physical therapists do when they elevated their required degree? Do you recall PT associations referring to bachelor's prepared PTs as "technicians"? Nope. They simply talked about how the knowledge base had increased and it was taking more time to learn all that PTs need to know.

As for what I'd like to see in an RN to BSN program, my answer is really based on what I'd like to see in ALL nursing programs. I think we need more hard science and less fluff (i.e. theory ad nauseum and care plan after care plan, oh let's not forget process recordings). In fact, we need a lot more hard science. We need more pharmacology, more pathophysiology, more biochemistry. These classes aren't needed only in RN to BSN programs--they're needed in every program. Nursing needs to be far more rigorous if we wish to elevate our status.

[Tweety, BSN, RN]

We should advocate BSN entry because we want to elevate the profession, because we want to standardize, and because we want to increase the knowledge base of nurses.

In other words what you're saying here is that ADN nurses bring down the nursing profession and it needs to be elevated because of ADNs? Are you saying that ADNs don't have the same knowledge bases as BSNs when we passed the same NCLEX? How insulting to ADNs.

See what I mean.

[Sandwitch883RN]

I am an ADN prepared RN and feel that, for me, it isn't a stopping place but a starting place. I went the ADN route so that I would be able to support my family, but I don't feel satisfied with being an ADN. It's not because I don't feel like a capable nurse, but I want to challenge myself to be better. I think each "step up the ladder" I will be an even better nurse. I think nurses should be recognized for more education. An LPN I work with said the only difference in our job is that I get paid more. Well she could get paid the same as me when she goes back to school and takes the same classes I did. I put alot of hard work into all of those care plans and additional semesters she didnt do. It has nothing to do with me being better. Shes a great nurse and has more experience than I do. I just feel protective of my title because of the hard work I put into it and I can see how BSN nurses feel the same. I'm not bashing, feel that anyone is superior or not valuable to the team. It's JMHO!

[oldiebutgoodie, RN]

MY SOLUTION TO IT ALL:

1. Only BSNs are allowed to become RNs.

2. That being said, AFFORDABLE BSN programs become available (wouldn't it be nice if the community colleges offered BSN programs?)

The reason there are so many ADN programs and ADNs is because it is affordable. In my opinion, anyone who is in an ADN program could probably do a BSN program just as successfully.

And when you think about it, many people do a year or two of prereqs before the ADN program anyway, thus the time being spent is about equivalent.

The problem with BSN programs is that they are SOOOO expensive. It is extremely hard to get into State U's BSN program, and the private programs practically want your first born male child.

So, ADNs will be with us until somehow BSN programs can be made affordable (haven't figured out yet how that works!)

And just an FYI, I precept both ADNs and BSNs, and the ADNs in general seem much more comfortable with the patients that the BSNs who seem to be afraid of their shadow. ;-)

Oldiebutgoodie

[DeadHeadRN, BSN, RN]

This is one of the biggest problems IMHO. New grads are being thrown into the chaos of healthcare without adequate preparation and orientation to the realities of modern nursing. While theory is quite interesting, we need to focus on reality. We loose many nurses in the first few years of their careers because I feel they are overwhelmed and unprepared to deal with the reality of nursing. While I suspect nursing program attrition rates would be higher, I think new grads would be much better prepared for entry into nursing and have realistic expectations regarding the work place.

Amen to that. I am a new RN (ADN) and the 1st 2 months of actually working as a nurse made me question my decision to become a nurse at all. School absolutely did not prepare me to be nurse. I've settled in nicely, but school was misleading.

As to the ADN-BSN debate, in my area the ADN and BSN programs have the same amount of clinical time. In fact with all my prerequisites to even get into my 2 year nursing program it took 3 1/2 years to get a 2 year nursing degree. That was going full time and with a Bachelors in communications already behind me. Those nurses who graduate from diploma programs, in my opinion, are the best clinically prepared nurses there are. I'll take the clinically prepared nurse over the BSN any day. If my life were on the line I'd certainly want the nurse who new how to be a nurse over the nurse who could spit out nursing theory and write great care plans all day long. That being said I will staring my BSN in September, but I do not feel that it will make me a better nurse. The RN-BSN programs around here offer NO courses that require clinical time. The courses required for the transition to the BSN are strictly nursing theory.