Wouldn't it make more sense to have all nurses become Rn's first?

Nursing Students ADN/BSN

Published

It's your favorite non troll back at it again.

Would't it make sense for the ANA to require all nurses have the same license first,then have all nurses get a Bsn??

I do not understand the ANA's position.

Like it or not,Lpn's are NURSES.(for the few that cannot understand that)

Why does not the ANA even acknowledge them?

I am ready to get cursed out btw.

Specializes in Behavioral Health/Substance Abuse.

In that way of thinking, why not have all medical doctors become, say, general physicians first?

Seriously...?

Specializes in OB-Gyn/Primary Care/Ambulatory Leadership.

Before requiring all Rn's have a Bsn,would not it make more sense for every nurse to be on the same level license -wise first?

Why? What would be the point of that? And who is requiring all RNs to have a BSN?

Do you not see value in the role of the LPN?

I'm really having a hard time figuring out what/why you're suggesting.

Specializes in OB-Gyn/Primary Care/Ambulatory Leadership.

American Nurses Association.

It does not say American Registered Nurse's Association.

No, but that does not change the fact that it's an organization for and about registered nurses.

From their website:

ANA is the only professional organization representing the interests of all registered nurses, regardless of areas of specialization, clinical setting or work environment.

Would't it make sense for the ANA to require all nurses have the same license first,then have all nurses get a Bsn??

Make sense to whom? There are many areas of employment that require a nurse, but not necessarily a registered nurse. The LPN can fill a role that requires a nurse's thinking and understanding of medical terminology and situations, as well as essential nursing care and skills. For this, LPNs are valuable members of a healthcare team. What "sense" does it make to eliminate the role and require anyone who wishes to do the job have a higher education/degree than reasonable for the position? Using this logic, the physician assistant role should also be eliminated in favor of requiring anyone who wants to provide any level of medical care become a physician. Seems like overkill, no?

I do not understand the ANA's position.

Apparently. In a nutshell, they are a professional and political organization (as has been mentioned already) that advocates for RNs. What is left to not understand? Is the problem that you are of the belief that every private organization must include every possible variation for membership? Do you think that an organization for LPNs exclusively would be 'wrong' in that it wouldn't be open to RNs for membership? Why?

Like it or not,Lpn's are NURSES.(for the few that cannot understand that). Why does not the ANA even acknowledge them?

Insulting and condescending commentary aside, this statement has nothing whatsoever to do with the ANA as an organization......or whether every State in the country should rescind all practical nurse licenses in favor of registered nurse ones (which is what YOU suggested, strange though it is).

I am ready to get cursed out btw.

I imagine you'd be disappointed then. I don't see anything you wrote as causing anyone to "curse" you, but you sure did create some confusion as to what you are advocating for!

Specializes in Pediatrics, Emergency, Trauma.

ANA is for registered nurses; NAPNES is for LPNs...both advocate for each scope and role respectively.

Another piece of the puzzle are state nursing associations, which set the tone of scope and practice in states, NOT the associations.

Until there is a federal bar set (don't see it happening), this conversation is pretty much moot.

I understand,i think.

American Nurses Association.

It does not say American Registered Nurse's Association.

The American Nurses' Association was founded before the invention of LPNs, when "nurse" meant Registered Nurse because there wasn't any other kind. They have not seen any need to change the name of the organization. LPNs have their own organizations.

It seems odd to me that you would be (sounds to me like) getting snippy about the ANA not including LPNs in the same thread in which you appear to be advocating for the elimination entirely of LPNs. (Am I the only one who is reading it that way? It's an unusually confusing original post.)

Thi bigger debate nurse's have at work is many professional positions example like teacher's require you to have a bachelor's degree...why aren't nurse's placed at the same standard. I think if you look at other healthcare professions many are at the associate level...thin I think that comes down to demand.

Now what if associate level makes you a LPN where a BSN makes you an RN

Specializes in Operating Room.

Before requiring all Rn's have a Bsn,would not it make more sense for every nurse to be on the same level license -wise first?

Registered Nurses have the same license whether their education is ADN/ASN, BSN, MSN. All RN's take the same licensing exam (NCLEX).

LPN's have a different scope of practice than RN's. Both positions are important but they are different and therefore take different licensing exams, no need for them to be on the "same level" as they are just on different levels.

Ok,i see where it can be confusing.

Somehow the discussion

I the started wondering why the Usa had 2 types of nursing licenses,and how that came to be.

I reread the history of nursing,and Rn's came before Lpn's.

The two licenses came about because of a shortage of WW2,and has stayed that way since.

The ANA has been around since 1911.

I was under the impression that that the ANA included Lpn's,and if so,why were they not questioning their educational level like they were Adn's?

^^^^Interesting what degree were nurse's prior to WW2?

^^^^Interesting what degree were nurse's prior to WW2?

The vast majority of US RNs were educated in hospital-based diploma schools, and there were also some BSN programs.

ADN nursing programs were developed post-WWII; there was a nursing shortage and a desire for a pathway to quickly turn out large numbers of RNs.

Practical nursing educational programs have been around since the early 1900s, but they weren't licensed and regulated by any US state until after WWII.

Specializes in Oncology; medical specialty website.
Really? The question is in the title.

Before requiring all Rn's have a Bsn,would not it make more sense for every nurse to be on the same level license -wise first?

The ANA does not regulate nursing licensure; that is the job of the state where the nurse resides. I'm not sure how else to describe this. Actually, I'm surprised an RN doesn't already understand this.

+ Add a Comment