Voicing an opinion

[cb_rn]

I'm reading this interesting book by Kathleen Heinrich called A Nurse's Guide to Presenting & Publishing and she writes fairly early in the book that as nurses we spend so many years quoting others that basically we forget how to express our own opinion in writing.

It really hit home. I'm working on an MSN and have hopes of getting a doctorate one day and am having some trouble -- its not the academic work -- for example I had to write a paper that discussed the ethics of abortion. Well I'm not going to turn this thread into a debate on abortion but the point is that I know how I feel about it but I would never express my belief to a patient and I try extremely hard to be objective and not have a personal feeling on a patient's decision like that (now let them not take their bp meds and I'm all over it with giving them my opinion).

How in the hell am I going to write a dissertation if I can't find ten pages to express my views on some ethical issues? Have I really become so focused on the nuts and bolts of nursing that I don't have an argument on an issue like that anymore? I really think my issue is that I feel I can't add anything substantial to the debate because its already been said and nothing I can add will "prove" that abortion is right or wrong.

Why can't we write papers on something I feel I can discuss that matters? (Meaning, why does it matter how I feel on abortion if the world doesn't operate based on my feelings? I can't prove that my feelings are the right ones to have no matter how many good points I can type out. On the other hand, I can write a paper about whether clear occlusive dressings or gauze and tape dressings are better for PICC lines and I feel I can say something substantial that has measure and can be proven so its worth writing out an opinion)

I guess I don't really have a question but I was wondering if anyone else out there felt the same way.

[netglow, ASN, RN]

If this is the topic your instructor insists you use, it was a very poor choice IMHO. It doesn't allow you to explore something you have not in the past. I also believe that feelings can be so strong, that dependent on the instructor's professional level, I might feel some pressure to fall on the "correct" side of this topic and would artificially work a lot of politically correct verbiage.

[TDCHIM]

If this is the topic your instructor insists you use, it was a very poor choice IMHO. It doesn't allow you to explore something you have not in the past. I also believe that feelings can be so strong, that dependent on the instructor's professional level, I might feel some pressure to fall on the "correct" side of this topic and would artificially work a lot of politically correct verbiage.

Perhaps the prof is using this as a jump-off point into the way ethics truly works? Some teachers and professors will do that sort of thing. They'll give students an easily jumped-on topic that generates some sort of deep opinion or feeling from nearly everyone, spend the course going through the basics of ethics, the different branches or schools of ethical thought, the ways to construct and attack an argument, etc. Then at the end of the course, they have students go back over their original paper and evaluate it for errors and weaknesses, then rewrite it using what they've learned during the class.

[netglow, ASN, RN]

TDCHIM,

I hope the OP has got herself a good instructor.

[Moogie]

Perhaps the prof is using this as a jump-off point into the way ethics truly works? Some teachers and professors will do that sort of thing. They'll give students an easily jumped-on topic that generates some sort of deep opinion or feeling from nearly everyone, spend the course going through the basics of ethics, the different branches or schools of ethical thought, the ways to construct and attack an argument, etc. Then at the end of the course, they have students go back over their original paper and evaluate it for errors and weaknesses, then rewrite it using what they've learned during the class.

That sounds like a great way to teach ethics. In my program, ethics was a component in the health care policy and finance course, which made it a bit much for a three-credit class. We didn't have to do ethics papers but we had to incorporate ethics into our other papers and presentations. I have mixed feelings about a separate ethics course vs. ethics as an integrated component; I think one can focus on ethics a bit better when it's a separate course but when it's integrated, one can actually apply ethics to practical situations.

Also, thank you, triquee, for a very informative post. I am going to save those links as they might come in handy someday.

[Moogie]

If this is the topic your instructor insists you use, it was a very poor choice IMHO. It doesn't allow you to explore something you have not in the past. I also believe that feelings can be so strong, that dependent on the instructor's professional level, I might feel some pressure to fall on the "correct" side of this topic and would artificially work a lot of politically correct verbiage.

Honestly, that's what makes me uncomfortable about the choice of this particular topic. Unless it is as TDCHIM described (which sounds like a very valuable assignment) there's a real risk of falling on the "wrong" side of the topic and the student getting stereotyped negatively due to his/her reactions. I can see how the student who is against abortion could be stereotyped as a knee-jerk religious fanatic by a liberal instructor and how the student who is pro-choice could be stereotyped as a Godless, sinful heathen by a religious conservative.

I hope it is as TDCHIM described and not as my friend 2ndwind and I see as the worst case scenario.

[metal_m0nk, BSN, RN]

If this is the topic your instructor insists you use, it was a very poor choice IMHO. It doesn't allow you to explore something you have not in the past. I also believe that feelings can be so strong, that dependent on the instructor's professional level, I might feel some pressure to fall on the "correct" side of this topic and would artificially work a lot of politically correct verbiage.

My guess is, if it's a masters level course, the instructor expects the students to have a good deal of experience in writing arguments (from undergrad) and is expecting them to use that experience to tackle a hot button issue - hot button issues being some of the most challenging topics for use in creating an effective and academically sound argument. It might be a "writing or argument analysis taken to the next level" kind of thing.

[TDCHIM]

That sounds like a great way to teach ethics. In my program, ethics was a component in the health care policy and finance course, which made it a bit much for a three-credit class. We didn't have to do ethics papers but we had to incorporate ethics into our other papers and presentations. I have mixed feelings about a separate ethics course vs. ethics as an integrated component; I think one can focus on ethics a bit better when it's a separate course but when it's integrated, one can actually apply ethics to practical situations.

I took medical ethics as a separate class (I know, a future paper-pusher taking a medical ethics class - there are about a million jokes that can be made here, so insert your favorite!) and I really enjoyed having it as a separate, intensive class. I understand what you're saying about having the application portion built in to a multi-pronged course, in which ethics is simply one of the component pieces. However, I think sometimes when it is done that way, the basic inner workings of ethics - the actual meaning of the word, the different schools of thought, how to effectively construct and criticize an argument on logical rather than emotional grounds - end up getting lost in the shuffle.

The prof for my class had us do the reading and we listened to her lectures on each area; then she would post online a couple of real-life scenarios for us that everyone had to respond to at least once. People got into very passionate but largely logically valid debates on various points, which made the class very lively - it was an online course and had by far the best overall useful participation I've ever encountered in any course, whether traditional or online, honors or mainstream. Overall, it was a genuinely useful class in that she did the instructional teaching but we did the work of teaching ourselves how to apply the material. She never betrayed any real signs of her own opinions and I never received the impression that I had to adhere to her opinion standards in order to get a decent grade. I really hope the OP has ended up with a good prof for her class; it's a great class if done the right way, but boring and next to worthless if handled poorly.

[cb_rn]

I'll let you guys know how it turns out. My gut feeling says TDCHIM is right and this paper is going to be staring me in the face the whole summer. Triquee those are great links. They definitely got put in my bookmarks. Kind of wishing I had taken a religion course instead of an ethics one

[metal_m0nk, BSN, RN]

Also, keep in mind that it is only an academic paper. If you honestly feel that there is more empirical evidence for a stance other than your own, it is okay to play devil's advocate and argue for the other side. Don't let it be a test of faith. It doesn't need to be. It simply needs to be an exploration of the concepts of drafting an effective argument. It could end up being especially impressive to your instructor if you were able to present a cogent argument for the other side while placing in the side bar that it isn't a view you hold personally. Talk about an example of approaching and posing solutions for ethical issues from a place of objectivity...

It would likely be harder to do than to find reasons to support your own view, as if would be difficult to filter your perspective. But it is an option.

[Moogie]

I took medical ethics as a separate class (I know, a future paper-pusher taking a medical ethics class - there are about a million jokes that can be made here, so insert your favorite!) and I really enjoyed having it as a separate, intensive class. I understand what you're saying about having the application portion built in to a multi-pronged course, in which ethics is simply one of the component pieces. However, I think sometimes when it is done that way, the basic inner workings of ethics - the actual meaning of the word, the different schools of thought, how to effectively construct and criticize an argument on logical rather than emotional grounds - end up getting lost in the shuffle.

The prof for my class had us do the reading and we listened to her lectures on each area; then she would post online a couple of real-life scenarios for us that everyone had to respond to at least once. People got into very passionate but largely logically valid debates on various points, which made the class very lively - it was an online course and had by far the best overall useful participation I've ever encountered in any course, whether traditional or online, honors or mainstream. Overall, it was a genuinely useful class in that she did the instructional teaching but we did the work of teaching ourselves how to apply the material. She never betrayed any real signs of her own opinions and I never received the impression that I had to adhere to her opinion standards in order to get a decent grade. I really hope the OP has ended up with a good prof for her class; it's a great class if done the right way, but boring and next to worthless if handled poorly.

I agree with you about how ethics content can get lost in the shuffle of other courses. I felt that way about my ethics-policy-health care financing course but I have had a separate ethics course in the past so it wasn't an issue for me. I don't know how other classmates felt about the course---the course was less than satisfying but for reasons other than the course content.

You are completely right about the importance of the way in which a course is taught. It is intimidating and squelches learning if a professor is more stuck on his/her own opinion than on helping students come to their own conclusions, even if they disagree.

[elkpark]

Perhaps it would be helpful to think of the paper not in terms of adding something worthwhile to the national debate ('cause it's certainly true that about everything that can be said has been said, many, many times) or whether or not your paper would be able to convince some "audience" to change her/his position, but simply as an academic exercise in clarifying, organizing, and communicating your own views as an end unto itself. Your paper doesn't have to change the world (or anyone else's opinion) -- just do an effective job of stating your own position and how you have arrived at it. In my experience, it's easy to be intimidated by this kind of assignment if you build it up too much in your own mind beyond what it is intended to be -- an academic exercise in clearly stating a position/argument. It doesn't even matter what position you take; the point is, can you coherently argue that position? One of my best learning experiences in grad school was participating in a classroom debate in which I chose to take the opposite side of an issue/question from what I personally believed; I had to really research and reason and work to successfully argue the opposite of my personal opinion/view on the subject. Not only was I on the "wrong" side of the question (along with a classmate who proved almost completely useless in the exercise; turned out she couldn't reason her way out of a paper bag), but everyone in the class disagreed with the position I was taking (a v. politically unpopular position in nursing) -- but, at the end of the class and five different debates on different subjects, my team (me and the useless classmate) were voted by the class as having been most effective and compelling of anyone in the class (including all the people who had argued v. politically correct and popular positions within the nursing community) in making the case for our (chosen) position.

A big part of grad school is learning to think through and effectively communicate a position or point of view. If you focus on that aspect of this paper, it may make it easier for you (cut the assignment down to size). Best wishes!

[cb_rn]

Thanks elkpark. That's great advice. It is just an academic exercise, after all.

I was turning this into some sort of spirtual crisis. >.

So I wrote the first draft and made the required number of pages. I'm going to let it cool off before I do any revising. I know I'm going to have to go back fix my wordiness. My husband teases me all the time for my big vocabulary (ok, when were stationed near a beach and I said wonder why there are more coniferous trees here than deciduous? -- he still teases me about that) but I've noticed when I write something on the fly I make crazy mistakes. Like writing "thinly barbed insult" instead of "thinly veiled insult" Pfft. I knew what I meant! (Sometimes I lose others in the translation though.) I am determined that I'm going to ace this class.