to me, it's the ultimate measure of desperation on the part of nurses to develop independence from physicians. that it has been turned into a "science" demeans the nursing profession terribly!
while there can be certainly a psychological/placebo effect, the seriousness with which even some phd's in nursing believe in literal truth of therapeutic touch simply amazes me.
it's witchcraft. sheer absolute nonsense in its highest refined form. the techniques are quite laughable, and have no place in medicine, any more than folk remedies supplied by witch doctors.
yet at virtually every major university, there are ladies with phd's running around who literally believe they've developed these powers in their hands. that they can "ruffle" and "realign" forces.
to many, this is the holy grail of nursing. to me, it's delusionary.
Quantum physics (in a nutshell: all the somethings in the universe are made of nothing; literally, the world is made of the same stuff as dreams.) explains the existence of God just as equally as it does TT. For you to arbitrarily decide it is an explanation of TT over God is YOUR value judgment. For me to look at the same data and see that it proves the hand of God in the universe is MINE.
I was suggesting that, since you kept saying that TT was linked to some religion , God or whatever, that you could drop that and also explain it with today's science.
You can call that science. But that 'science' is colored by your beliefs. Your 'beliefs' 'prove' the science; not the other way around.
And that's one fault of the "Scientific process"...people are involved.
And TT is indeed based on Eastern religions. Why should I drop what is a valid fact?
Maybe it's also a fact that almost everything is based on Eastern religions...uh maybe philosophy would be a better term.
That's fine, but is anyone saying TT deserves a higher value....?
there is a nanda diagnosis for disturbed energy field, and the recommended nic intervention is therapeutic touch. there is nothing i've been able to find in nanda or nic for christain prayer, muslim prayer, voodoo etc.
so i'd say yes, someone is saying it deserves a higher value as nursing knowledge.
if it were a valid treatment, it would have already spread like wildfire. [/quote}
We have light bulbs that never burn out and cars that can run forever on a gal of fuel. We've had them for years. But I don't see them selling in the marketplace and I bet you can also figure out why.
then she could have been curing people all these years! i'm not going to tell her about this, because she'd feel horribly guilty...
Oh go ahead and tell her. I've been a nurse for 32 years and I'm still learning.
of course, double blind studies aren't accurate, are they? yet if they supported your view, i'm sure their accuracy would be unquestionable. heck, if they supported tt, i'd believe in it!
Double blind studies are not that valid since they do not (can't) measure consciousness. If the doctor and patient both did not know they were in a study, it would be more valid.
There are many considerations during a study. The patient usually has an overwhelming desire to please the shaman...I mean physician. If the patient hates the doc, the opposite might occur. Unconsciously, the patient "knows" what the doctor wants the outcome to be. Two people doing the exact same study can get opposite results. A doc knows that he is part of a study. He hates one patient in the study and unconsciously, another patient reminds him of his father who he loved deeply. Unconsciously he will treat both differently. Since he has...just cancel the study.
if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then by golly...
if it were a valid treatment, it would have already spread like wildfire. [/quote}
We have light bulbs that never burn out and cars that can run forever on a gal of fuel. We've had them for years. But I don't see them selling in the marketplace and I bet you can also figure out why.
this brings us to the conspiracy theory. we've got a car that runs forever on a gallon of gas? in the first place, i don't buy into conspiracy theories. too many would have to be too silent for too long for this to be true. you'd have to have so many acting in the same way to preserve the status quo without breaking ranks that i can't buy it. of course, these theories always involve some sort of hidden technology that no one knows anything about, because there is a secret patent that prevents the knowledge from spreading since it would be illegal. i submit that there would be exact plans on how to build such machines posted all over the internet. hang the legalities. there are sites set up to explain how to grow marijuana, etc. now, why would those be there, but sites explaining how to make an engine run forever on a gallon of gasoline would be secretly snuffed out? if this existed, there would be hoards of people building these devices in their garages. this is only urban legend.
as an aside, i'd like to refer folks to calcars.org. now there's an example of garage inventors doing something to make a difference. when lithium battery technology improves (i'd guess around 5 to 10 years)...we're going to see some great improvements in automobile efficiency.
but that's not the case with tt. it involves nothing except 2 people. there's no hidden technology there. the technique is quite simple, and instruction is readily available. if this worked effectively, it would be spread so widely in our society that everyone would know how to do it by the time they were in preschool.
The fact that nursing theorist have done research and have been embraced by the nursing community.
Martha E. Rogers she was Professor and Head of the Division of Nursing at New York University. In 1979 she became Professor Emeritus.
For a Nursing diagnosis to be removed, I would suggest, get a Phd, do research and prove her wrong.
You can't ignore nursing theorists who have been embraced by the nursing community, it would be an injustice to the graduate student. Also in graduate school nursing theory the basis of many programs, how can you pick and choose which nursing theories you wish to teach.
Of course once you become a nursing leader with you can choose which nursing theorist you base your practice on.
The fact that nursing theorist have done research and have been embraced by the nursing community.
Martha E. Rogers she was Professor and Head of the Division of Nursing at New York University. In 1979 she became Professor Emeritus.
For a Nursing diagnosis to be removed, I would suggest, get a Phd, do research and prove her wrong.
You can't ignore nursing theorists who have been embraced by the nursing community, it would be an injustice to the graduate student. Also in graduate school nursing theory the basis of many programs, how can you pick and choose which nursing theories you wish to teach.
Of course once you become a nursing leader with you can choose which nursing theorist you base your practice on.
Sure I can ignore her. She's one of the main reasons why nursing theory isn't taken seriously and the reason why I refer to the Ivory Tower as arrogant elitists.
I've said it several times on this website: the problem w/ new nurses is that they have to learn what was worth learning and what was worth junking to the curb. ONLY AFTER they learn to chuck 'theory' to the curb can they open up to the OJT learning necessary to be a good nurse. And I'm not talking about 'skills', but critical thinking 'instincts'.
Nursing theory is irrelevant. Made so by Rogers, et. al.
Have you ever tried to debate Rogers in ANY program/forum? Most of what she said made no sense. It was pure pseudo-intellectual pseudo-science garbage. If you ever try to debate her you get some form of: you just didn't understand her. HELLO. NOBODY UNDERSTOOD HER. Even the people that claim to understand her don't understand her. But for fear of being shunned by their peers for 'not getting it', they 'get it'.
In fact, her pseudo-language theories are purposely obtuse IN ORDER to claim exclusive understanding. "you just don't get it'.
It's like modern 'art'. Ok, yeah: I'm sure SOMEBODY SOMEWHERE knows the rules for why all the lines and squiggles and blobs mean something or takes something to the next level. But, for the majority of us, it's just a bunch of lines and squiggles and blobs.
And so, it's absolutely irrelevant. I'm not dismissing TT. I'm saying that TT as a part of the nursing curriculum is divisive and it sets us back. It sets us back because our allied health peers laugh at this 'pseudo-science' garbage. It's divisive because it tries to indoctrinate faith. Since most nurses (in the States at least) aren't Eastern religious practitioners, they will dismiss the TT part of nursing's core knowledge specifically and the whole package generally.
So, instead of increasing the validity of TT, the process just DECREASES the validity of 'nursing knowledge'.
Martha Rogers, Jean Watson, and their ilk is the WORST possible thing that could have happened to nursing. They set us back 50 yrs.
The fact that nursing theorist have done research and have been embraced by the nursing community.
Martha E. Rogers she was Professor and Head of the Division of Nursing at New York University. In 1979 she became Professor Emeritus.
For a Nursing diagnosis to be removed, I would suggest, get a Phd, do research and prove her wrong.
You can't ignore nursing theorists who have been embraced by the nursing community, it would be an injustice to the graduate student. Also in graduate school nursing theory the basis of many programs, how can you pick and choose which nursing theories you wish to teach.
Of course once you become a nursing leader with you can choose which nursing theorist you base your practice on.
hmmm... just because she's martha rogers doesn't make her theories fact. it's not about a popularity contest. there are plenty of dissenting voices.
according to nursing theorist myra levine:
"The pretense of the healers that they perform scientific therapies is unconscionable." .... "In our struggle to achieve academic recognition as a profession, we simply can't afford to indulge in this kind of charlatanism. Therapeutic Touch challenges the validity of modern nursing research, teaching and practice. If its practitioners insist on their healing roles, let them honestly call themselves faith healers and stop claiming they are nurses who heal."
does myra qualify? or do i need to personally get a phd to differ with tt?
i am saying we need to have valid research, and practice based on evidence... not theories. i have yet to see evidence presented that would convince me that tt is based on science. and i am far from alone in this.
Martha Rogers, Jean Watson, and their ilk is the WORST possible thing that could have happened to nursing. They set us back 50 yrs.
It's sad to say, but it is taking outside agencies composed of our allied health peers to right the ship of nursing knowledge.
JCAHO, with thier buy-in to the Institutes for Healthcare Initiative's 100,000 lives campaign is going to force 'evidence based practices' onto nursing - in spite of ourselves.
It's sad to say, but it is taking outside agencies composed of our allied health peers to right the ship of nursing knowledge.
JCAHO, with thier buy-in to the Institutes for Healthcare Initiative's 100,000 lives campaign is going to force 'evidence based practices' onto nursing - in spite of ourselves.
Thankfully.
~faith,
Timothy.
heh. yes, thankfully! go JCAHO!
tim, while there are nurses like you who stand up to this sort of mystical nonsense becoming codified as nursing knowledge, there is hope for this profession. i think there are many of us who understand our responsibility to the public and to the profession. we cannot let a minority of nurses destroy the public's confidence in the profession in order to fullfill their own psychological needs.
hmmm... just because she's martha rogers doesn't make her theories fact. it's not about a popularity contest. there are plenty of dissenting voices.
according to nursing theorist myra levine:
"The pretense of the healers that they perform scientific therapies is unconscionable." .... "In our struggle to achieve academic recognition as a profession, we simply can't afford to indulge in this kind of charlatanism. Therapeutic Touch challenges the validity of modern nursing research, teaching and practice. If its practitioners insist on their healing roles, let them honestly call themselves faith healers and stop claiming they are nurses who heal."
does myra qualify? or do i need to personally get a phd to differ with tt?
i am saying we need to have valid research, and practice based on evidence... not theories. i have yet to see evidence presented that would convince me that tt is based on science. and i am far from alone in this.
I'm so glad that you started this thread. Too much of our nursing education is misdirected - instead of focusing on the real world of nursing it emphasizes theoretical frameworks for nursing practice. I think TT and bogus nursing diagnoses are evidence of this sorry situation.
I'm not discounting the spiritual side of the type of work we do. We are touching the lives of other human beings when they are most vulnerable. My problem with TT is that I don't base my nursing practice on my feelings - nursing practice is based on what really works and when we learn better, scientifically proven methods, we use them. I've never felt an energy field.
I can personally attest to the ineffectiveness of some alternative medical treatments because when I was told that I needed surgery for a medical condition I tried all of the available alternative treatments. I spent a lot of money, wasted a lot of time and consumed useless concoctions that probably made my condition worse. And in the end I had my surgery and it took care of my problem.
I'm open to exploring new treatments, but teaching TT in nursing programs is ridiculous. It should not be something that is graded and used to determine whether someone is qualified to get their degree. Nursing programs have enough strange electives. (I say this because I'm in school again right now and my colleagues and I have wondered about some of the courses we are required to take that haven't us in any way to become better nurses)
zenman
1 Article; 2,806 Posts
That's fine, but is anyone saying TT deserves a higher value....?