does therapeutic touch belong in grad programs?

Nursing Students Post Graduate

Published

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.

comments?

sure.

yes, and i do liken it to witchcraft, levitation, and other paranormal beliefs, though i do credit it with a placebo effect. not to mention that it makes the practitioners feel good about themselves :).

do i think it belongs in a grad program, taught as literal truth? no.

do i think it reflects desperation on the part of nurses for independence from traditional medicne? yes.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Oh, boy a bunch of newbies who need enlightenment! Where do I start?

....

1. "Modern" medicine is way behind (about a 100 years) the current sciences. Some of the diagnostic machines now used in the hospital work on principals that modern medicine does not believe in!

.....

Would you mind giving examples of this? One example of how modern medicine is 100 years behind the current sciences? Which sciences? Which diagnostic machines work on principles that modern medicine does not believe in? (Is "belief" the right word, or would have evidence for, be more accurate?) Have you seen the movie "What the %^$# Do We Know?" I'm sincerely curious, I'm not trying to flame you.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Would you mind giving examples of this? One example of how modern medicine is 100 years behind the current sciences? Which sciences? Which diagnostic machines work on principles that modern medicine does not believe in? (Is "belief" the right word, or would have evidence for, be more accurate?) Have you seen the movie "What the %^$# Do We Know?" I'm sincerely curious, I'm not trying to flame you.

Yeah Zenman, I'm curious too. Just curious.

How are you btw?

steph

Up Vote Up Vote ×

ahem. while i don't believe in TT, there are many TT practitioners who can nurse circles around me, till i collapsed on the floor. i would certainly like to give respect where it is due. :).:bow:

i have stated some strong opinions, but i am discussing here in good faith, and welcome any evidence that supports TT. prove your case, if you wish. perhaps you can change my mind.

to those who believe in TT.. how closely do you identify yourself with TT? is it something you look to practice daily? do you believe it should be taught to all nursing students, and at what level?

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Too many to list.
Hypothesis: the further you get from patient care and the more dependent you become on academia to support you in your ivory tower, the more you reach out towards Reiki (sp?), therapeutic touch and nursing theory to support your mere existence.

Ivory tower and academia? Bedside nursing and direct patient care is where I practice. Alternative and complementary modalities are just that, alternative and complementary, but they do add to my ability to make my patients comfortable, and to my knowledge base of what is going on with that patient.

I've been caring for patients for almost 25 years, not theorizing, doing.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Too many to list.
Well, hate to shock you further, but "that ivy" has a workshop or course on reiki, which is the updated version of TT. Lots of students there, esp in my program, are uncritically into alternative medicine, which I doubt will surprise you. Personally I feel there might be a beneficial placebo effect whenever a care provider spends time with a patient, whether they are actually touching them or not. Skeptic magazine had quite a few articles on TT and Emily Rosa and her experiments to debunk it.

Reiki is not an updated version of Therapeutic Touch. Therapeutic Touch was developed by Dolores Kreiger, PhD RN of NYU, based on her training from Dora Kuntz. I won't go into the mechanics of it, but it is very different from Reiki which was developed in the 1800's by Mikao Usui in Kyoto, Japan.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Oh, boy a bunch of newbies who need enlightenment! Where do I start?

How about starting with a condescending comment about enlightening a bunch of newbies? :) Sorry - I know that probably wasn't your intent.

Just a couple of things to add:

- I certainly didn't intend to say that the JAMA article from the fourth grader should be regarded as evidence that TT is completely worthless. My comment was more along the lines that TT recevied a damaging blow at that time, in the form of bad press. I'm interested, however, in any info on to the firing of Dr George Lundberg (JAMA editor) and how it relates to the publication of that article. Although I know that there was more to the story than just one bad decision (in fact, a long series of political and editorial disagreements), most sources refer to the firing as ultimately stemming from a completely separate incident. I can only find a few mentions of protest related to this incident, but they came in reaction to Dr Lundberg's firing.

- Re: Dr Stephen Barrett, author of the Quackwatch website who takes a super hard line (too hard, most would say) against many alternative therapies. Dr Barrett is commonly referred to as 'delicensed.' Although Dr Barrett no longer holds an active medical license in PA, it's because he no longer sees patients. This 'delicensing' was not related to any disciplinary action.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I used therapeutic touch for my migraines and it worked on me. I am sad that it's been debunked. I don't know much about it except it had to do with energy forces alignment. Qi Cong, a Chinese practice as old as acupunture, is also related to energy forces - the "Qi" actually means energy. Qi Cong has always, and is still in use. Acupuncture is also related to energy forces.

I don't know the origin of TT, the belief in energy forces have been around for a while. Just because we don't know much about it doesn't mean its hocus pocus. The concept of psychosomatic disease is very new, too, and now its widely accepted that a healthy mind can lead to a healthy body. That used to be such an intangible concept for people, and now it can be proven.

Like I said, I know nothing about the origin of TT, but it worked for me the couple of times I tried it. I would loved to have been able to study it.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Too many to list.

Does this belong in grad programs? Or any nursing program? I think yes, as an elective. If staff and students are interested, why not? It seems, well, mean spirited to deny this training developed primarily by nurses, just because some consider it fluff. You have a right to your beliefs and opinions, certainly. These modalities are experiential, and I suspect that if someone is not open to them, they won't experience what someone else might. The laying on of hands is as old as mankind. Touch is necessary, and it is comforting. It does not require belief to be effective, but being open to what may be there. Do you believe in intuition? Can you explain it? In what part of your body are your emotions located? What about your thoughts, where are they located?

Up Vote Up Vote ×

returning to the thread's original question, does this belong in graduate level programs?

Maybe only as an elective. Remember that one should provide what the customers want...if you want to stay in business.

Would you mind giving examples of this? One example of how modern medicine is 100 years behind the current sciences? Which sciences? Which diagnostic machines work on principles that modern medicine does not believe in? (Is "belief" the right word, or would have evidence for, be more accurate?) Have you seen the movie "What the %^$# Do We Know?" I'm sincerely curious, I'm not trying to flame you.

One example is the mammogram which is an electronic image of the radiant energy of the cells and tissues. But, if you start talking about "sensing energy" some people go berserk! I heard one guy say that modern medicine doesn't even believe cell phones can work.

I can teach you to sense energy very quickly by awakening senses which are now dormant. I'll just blindfold you, stop up your ears and place you in the center of a room. Then I'm going to sneak up on you and beat you with a bamboo pole. I'll keep doing this and in about an hour or less you'll be a different person and be able to avoid my thrashing just by your new sensing ability.

Physics is the foundation for all sciences, but biological sciences (Western medicine) still rely on the outdated Newtonian viewpoint which fell out of favor around 100 years ago. I guess some people are slow to change.

I have the DVD "What the bleep do we know?" and will look at it again tonight. One person in the movie was Fred Alan Wolfe, a physicist who has studied with shamans. His book "The Eagles Quest" as well as Fritjof Capra's "Uncommon Wisdom" are both books one should read.

I've been caring for patients for almost 25 years, not theorizing, doing.

So you have no framework which defines your practice? "Theory without Practice is Idle, Practice without Theory is Blind"

How about starting with a condescending comment about enlightening a bunch of newbies? :) Sorry - I know that probably wasn't your intent.

Only partially.

Re: Dr Stephen Barrett, author of the Quackwatch website who takes a super hard line (too hard, most would say) against many alternative therapies. Dr Barrett is commonly referred to as 'delicensed.' Although Dr Barrett no longer holds an active medical license in PA, it's because he no longer sees patients. This 'delicensing' was not related to any disciplinary action.

I understand that he was never able to pass boards to be certified, that he had few patients, and has not been allowed to practice in any state since 1993.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Too many to list.

Originally Posted by indigo girl:

I've been caring for patients for almost 25 years, not theorizing, doing.

Originally posted by Zenman:

So you have no framework which defines your practice? "Theory without Practice is Idle, Practice without Theory is Blind"

Zenman, I'm not saying that there is not theory to explain how the practice may work, just that I'm not in an Ivory Tower theorizing about it. I'm using it. I've been taught a framework with which to work in as anyone who has studied these modalities would have been. Does this clarify for you? And, in case you are wondering, I am very familiar with theory.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
I understand that he was never able to pass boards to be certified, that he had few patients, and has not been allowed to practice in any state since 1993.

No. The 'delicensure' occurred when Dr Barrett voluntarily asked PA not to renew the license that he had held since the 60's. Although his medical license has been inactive since that request in 1993, there was no disciplinary action in PA and I don't see any evidence that he was barred from practicing in any other state.

In the 1980's, his interest in health fraud began to take precedence, so I'm sure that at some point before closing his practice he probably only had a few patients.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Add a Comment