Will a mandate requring RN's to obtain BSN's contribute to a shortage?

[mttzakr87]

Will a mandate requring RN's to obtain BSN's contribute to a shortage?

One of the most attractive reason's people have flooded to Nursing aside from the most stable career imaginable is the fact that it can be done in two years. How many people would go to Nursing school if they had to do it for 3-4 years? Not to mention many students cant afford most 4 year schools.....they just cant. Sure maybe colleges, employers or maybe government can help alleviate the cost by helping to pay for it, or front some of the cost? But even if they did, how long would that last for, we all know college aint cheap....especially for tens of thousands of people out there? Canada requires BS for Nurses and their nursing shortage per patient is close to twice as big as ours, along with their major physcian shortage which is the real problem with their healthcare system but thats a whole different story....

Me personally, I understand the rationale for wanting to up the education for Nurses, as it is benefical for the patient and the Nurse, and there is real correlation between patient death rates and lesser education levels. But the bottom line......we need people who can do this period, at any education level possible, BSN, ADN, LPN...we need these people at all levels.

And what about the 2 year schools? They really get screwed any legislation as well...as nursing for a lot of these schools is a big draw. For me, the status quo is sufficent and we should just leave it alone.

[OCNRN63, RN]

If you believe nursing employment is not affected by the economy, you are in for a harsh wake up when you are competing in the job market.

Preach it, Sister!

[OCNRN63, RN]

In other words you're presenting a biased source to strengthen the case of the unbiased source?

I doubt you'll find anyone who disagrees with the notion that education has a strong impact on a nurse's ability to practice, or that patients deserve the best-educated workforce possible. The problem here is that you're trusting as your only authority the people who have a direct and personal stake in the outcome of such "studies". The JAMA doesn't vouch for everything it publishes.

You're buying into the idea that education is either on their terms or not at all, which of course is ridiculous.

When they can come up with something more definitive than "linked to", "associated with" or "a correlation was found" I'll stand by those who say there is no "proof". When you include the factors that would need to be isolated before proof can be claimed, you'll find some very large hurdles to take on.

In the meantime - if I ever have the chance to choose an ADN or diploma nurse with 20 years of experience in infectious disease for a family member with multiple co-morbidities over the brand new BSN who took care of a surgical patient in Pennsylvania who had the best surgeon in the country take out his gallbladder - I'll go with the first one.

What's wrong with Pennsylvania?

[nursel56]

Not a **** thing. I love Pennsylvania. It just happens to be the location of the 2003 Aiken review of records of surgical patients that's caused most of the ADN vs BSN patient outcome controversy. :)

[PMFB-RN, RN]

What's wrong with Pennsylvania?

*** I think the bias is with the AACN, who obviously has a dog in the fight and can not be considered unbiased. I didn't detect any comments reguarding Pennsylvania at all.

[suanna]

Why don't we just cut nursing education to a couple of weeks of employer based inservice and get rid of NCLEX alltogether! A two week course and the hospitals blessing and-poof- you are a nurse.

Seriously- shorter education time and a faster path to becoming a nurse sounds attractive when you are a week out of high school, but without a baseline education standard that provides a sound basis in science we will never be accepted as a partner in professional health care. Will it make the shortage worse? what shortage?- every waitress, cashier, burger flipper I talk to seem to be in school to become a nurse. Is it because it is presented as the fastest, easiest path to a good paying job with security in this economy? I don't want more people taking the fastest, easiest path to share the title of "Nurse" with me. If that is the direction nursing is going I don't want to be identified as a nurse.

[DoGoodThenGo]

Just to throw more petrol onto the fire there's this little tidbit: Education for Entry into Nursing Practice: Revisited for the 21^st Century

[nursel56]

Just to throw more petrol onto the fire there's this little tidbit: Education for Entry into Nursing Practice: Revisited for the 21^st Century

That's some impressive amount of verbiage right there. I see that the 1965 AJN position statement proposed that there should be a two-tiered system with associate's degree nurses called "technical nurses" and BSNs called "professional nurses" and this author alludes to that without coming right out with it but I never see that brought up in current discussions on the matter.

The attitude "infighting is bad for nursing -solution? Everyone should believe as we do- if you don't agree it'll be your fault when bad stuff happens."

It appears that shutting down "paternalistic" diploma schools and moving education to colleges and universities was in itself supposed to change people's opinions about whether nursing is seen as professional.

[DoGoodThenGo]

That's some impressive amount of verbiage right there. I see that the 1965 AJN position statement proposed that there should be a two-tiered system with associate's degree nurses called "technical nurses" and BSNs called "professional nurses" and this author alludes to that without coming right out with it but I never see that brought up in current discussions on the matter. .

Oh I don't know nothing about that. *LOL*

One has been talking about that little matter for ages on this forum, but no one is trying to hear anything about nurses being divided into "technical" and "professonal" based upon education.

My guess is now like then there is too much of a vested interest in everyone no matter how they came to be a RN retaining the right to call themselves a "professional". Remove that status and one assumes many feel it is a slippery slope between facility drudge on one side, and elite nurses on the other.

The attitude "infighting is bad for nursing -solution? Everyone should believe as we do- if you don't agree it'll be your fault when bad stuff happens."

It appears that shutting down "paternalistic" diploma schools and moving education to colleges and universities was in itself supposed to change people's opinions about whether nursing is seen as professional.

IMHO one little bit from the article summed things up nicely, "external locus of control".

[nursel56]

"The art of professions is cognitive artfulness. Nursing has made impressive strides in demonstrating its cognitive artfulness and exclusiveness."

I was just thinking about that the other day!

[watersamy]

ok, I am going to put my two cents in. Havin been enrolled in a 4 year BSN program, leaving after 2 1/2 years and then later going to an ADN program I can tell you that the only difference between the two programs are the "liberal arts classes" which are required for the BSN. An ADN program takes 3 years because of all the science pre-requisites. In my opinion, History, Philosophy and Art classes have little impact on a nurse's ability to perform her duties, be articulate and well educated. For me, I preferred the clinical aspect of the ADN program much more than the BSN program where we only completed 8 hours a week vs. the 16 hours at the ADN program. The ADN program clinicals were much more HANDS ON than those at the BSN where we did a lot of "observing".

[CNA1991, CNA]

*** In 16 years working in ICU, ER, critical care transport, and now rapid response I have never experienced that. I have worked in a number of large and small hospitals in 4 states and in my experience nurses (and for that matter doctors) are NOT judged by what degree they have, but rather by their competence and attitude. IN some hospital systems nobody has any idea what degree a nurse has unless you ask them. In others it is printed on their name badge but I can't tell a difference. Good, competent nurses who know their job, advocate for their patients, help their fellow nurses as needed, and who have a pleasant attitude are respected regardless of their degree. Those who have a bad attitude, and/or are incompetent are not respected regardless of their degree. A nurse with an MSN who regularly misses changes in their patients will be held in contempt in critical care environments.

I am talking about the public viewing nursing as 2 year degree rather than nurses and doctors judging the nurses they work with/know. Of course a doctor or nurse can tell who and who isn't competant at there job and they don't need to know what degree that nurse has to do it. Hospitals are now vieing for "magnet" status and want bragging rights to say they have the nurses with the most education and experience. If that wasn't the case, this thread wouldn't exist and a good amount of places wouldn't ask for only nurses with BSNs to apply. This isn't the first time I have heard about a complete BSN cross-over. If you were to ask an accountant what diffienturates a nurse with an ADN and a BSN, he would probably say something like "Well, the one with the BSN probably has more nursing education" when really, it's just more GE classes that seperate the two. Both have two-year, hands on, real nursing education in the program with the difference being the amount of classes they took before entering the thing that granted them premission to take the NCLEX-RN. If this wasn't an issue, LVN programs would stop dissapearing and a lot of hospitals would stop laying them off as well. It doesn't matter what the nurses and doctors say, hospitals want bragging rights and they will do anything they think will impress the public into wanting their business, at the expense of many competant, educated individuals who happen not to possess a BSN.

[PMFB-RN, RN]

I am talking about the public viewing nursing as 2 year degree rather than nurses and doctors judging the nurses they work with/know. Of course a doctor or nurse can tell who and who isn't competant at there job and they don't need to know what degree that nurse has to do it. Hospitals are now vieing for "magnet" status and want bragging rights to say they have the nurses with the most education and experience. If that wasn't the case, this thread wouldn't exist and a good amount of places wouldn't ask for only nurses with BSNs to apply. This isn't the first time I have heard about a complete BSN cross-over. If you were to ask an accountant what diffienturates a nurse with an ADN and a BSN, he would probably say something like "Well, the one with the BSN probably has more nursing education" when really, it's just more GE classes that seperate the two. Both have two-year, hands on, real nursing education in the program with the difference being the amount of classes they took before entering the thing that granted them premission to take the NCLEX-RN. If this wasn't an issue, LVN programs would stop dissapearing and a lot of hospitals would stop laying them off as well. It doesn't matter what the nurses and doctors say, hospitals want bragging rights and they will do anything they think will impress the public into wanting their business, at the expense of many competant, educated individuals who happen not to possess a BSN.

*** Yes I see your point. One small sliver lining is the rapidly diminishing repuation of Magnet certification and the hospitals that hold it. Already Magnet hospital have a reputation as not being good places to work among nurses. At least in my area of the country. All we really need is for 20/20 or some such show to show Magnet hospital nurses being threatend with their jobs if they don't answer survayers questions according to managments party line.