Notwithstanding the remarkable achievements made by medical science over the last half of the twentieth century, there is a palpable sense that a strictly medical view of human health, that is one founded on modernist assumptions, has become problematic, if not counterproductive. In this study, I argue that as nursing continues to eagerly welcome and indeed champion medical epistemology in the form of knowledge transfer, evidence‐based practice, research utilization, outcomes‐based practice, quantifiable efficiency and effectiveness, it risks becoming little more than (...) a medical science addendum and indeed one that inherits the problems now facing contemporary medicine. The purpose of this study then is to attempt to resituate nursing as a discipline at work within an ontopolitical matrix of radical democratic pluralism. I begin by tracing a philosophical line from Kuhn’s paradigms to Bloor’s strong programme of Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. Following this, I attempt to explicate the thought of Bruno Latour as a philosophical alternative to Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. Next, I outline the radical pluralism of William Connolly in an effort to demonstrate its similarity to Latour’s philosophy and finally how such a position is germane to contemporary nursing and the reality of politics. I do this with reference to the controversial issue of illicit drug use and harm reduction. In effect, I argue that such an issue cannot be dealt with using scientific evidence alone, but rather requires a philosophy of advocacy, what I term democratic advocacy, that is capable of responding to the politics of suffering, which is to say suffering that results from identity/difference. (shrink)

The question of whether nursing ethics is a distinct entity within bioethics is an important and thought-provoking one. Though fundamental bioethical principles are appreciated and applied within the practice of nursing ethics, there exist distinct considerations which make nursing ethics a unique subfield of bioethics. In this article, we focus on the importance of relationships as a distinguishing feature of the foundation of nursing ethics, evidenced in its education, practice, and science. Next, we consider two objections to our claim of (...) distinctiveness: first, that nursing ethics is merely an application of bioethical principles; second, that many bioethical subfields emphasize relationships. We respond by highlighting that throughout nursing education and generally in every career path that follows, the creation and nurturing of relationships is emphasized. Compassion and respect for the dignity of every patient is the framework upon which these therapeutic relationships are built. Much of the focus of nursing science rests on creating meaningful interpersonal experiences and human connection. After responding to each objection, we turn to the implications of this distinctiveness on clinical ethics practice, arguing that the strengths of our approach outweigh the limitations. The deep emphasis on creating meaningful interpersonal experiences and human connection supports a greater integration of relationships and social contexts into the evaluation of whether an action is ethically permissible, which is an important benefit in addressing the challenging human situations that patients face. Moreover, this perspective allows nurse ethicists to account for diverse and complex social structures and their influence in making ethical determinations. These strengths outweigh the limitations of potential inconsistencies between nurse and non-nurse clinical ethicists on the same service, a result we attribute to nursing ethics—and, in turn, the practice of the nurse ethicist—being framed by relationships to a larger extent than other bioethical subfields. (shrink)

Advocacy has become an accepted and integral attribute of nursing practice. Despite this adoption of advocacy, confusion remains about the precise nature of the concept and how it should be enacted in practice. The aim of this study was to investigate general nurses’ perceptions of being patient advocates in Ireland and how they enact this role. These perceptions were compared with existing theory and research on advocacy in order to contribute to the knowledge base on the subject. An inductive, qualitative (...) approach was used for this study. Three focus group interviews with a total of 20 practising nurses were conducted with a sample representing different grades in a general hospital setting. Data analysis was carried out using elements of Strauss and Corbins’ approach to concept development. The findings indicate that the principal role of the nurse advocate is to act as an intermediary between the patient and the health care environment. The results highlight that advocacy did, however, result in nurses becoming involved in conflict and confrontation with others and that it could be detrimental to nurses both professionally and personally. It was also clear that when enacting advocacy, nurses distinguished between ‘clinical advocacy’ (acting directly for patients in the clinical environment) and organizational advocacy (acting on an organizational level for one or more patients). (shrink)

Background: Nurses and surgeons may experience intra-team conflict during decision making about the use of postoperative life-sustaining treatment in the intensive care unit due to their perceptions of professional roles and responsibilities. Nurses have a sense of advocacy—a responsibility to support the patient’s best interest; surgeons have a sense of agency—a responsibility to keep the patient alive. Objectives: The objectives were to (1) describe the discourse surrounding the responsibilities of nurses and surgeons, as “advocates” and “agents,” and (2) apply these (...) findings to determine how differences in role responsibilities could foster conflict during decision making about postoperative life-sustaining treatment in the intensive care unit. Research design: Articles, books, and professional documents were explored to obtain descriptions of nurses’ and surgeons’ responsibilities to their patients. Using discourse analysis, responsibilities were grouped into themes and then compared for potential for conflict. Ethical considerations: No data were collected from human participants and ethical review was not required. The texts were analyzed by a surgeon and a nurse to minimize profession-centric biases. Findings: Four themes in nursing discourse were identified: responsibility to support patient autonomy regarding treatment decisions, responsibility to protect the patient from the physician, responsibility to act as an intermediary between the physician and the patient, and the responsibility to support the well-being of the patient. Three themes in surgery discourse were identified personal responsibility for the patient’s outcome, commitment to patient survival, and the responsibility to prevent harm to the patient from surgery. Discussion: These responsibilities may contribute to conflict because each profession is working toward different goals and each believes they know what is best for the patient. It is not clear from the existing literature that either profession understands each other’s responsibilities. Conclusion: Interventions that improve understanding of each profession’s responsibilities may be helpful to reduce intra-team conflict in the intensive care unit. (shrink)

Patient advocacy has been claimed as a new role for professional nurses and many codes of ethics for nurses state that they act as patient advocates. Nursing education is faced with the challenge of preparing nurses for this role. In this article we describe the results of a study that considered the tendencies of a cohort of nursing students at the Kocaeli University School of Nursing to act as advocates and to respect patients’ rights, and how their capacities to do (...) so changed (or not) as a result of their nursing education. This longitudinal study used a questionnaire consisting of 10 statements relating to patient care. It was performed both at the start (1998) and at the end (2002) of the nursing training. At the beginning of their course 77 students participated; in the study. After four years, only 55 students participated, the reason for this drop in number being unknown. The questions asked nurses if patients should have: the right to receive health care; the right to participate in the decision-making process about their treatment; the right always to be told the truth; and the right to have access to their own medical records. They were also asked: if quality of life should be a criterion for discontinuing treatment; if patients have the right to die and the right to refuse treatment; if patients should be assisted to die or helped to undergo active euthanasia; and if severely disabled newborn babies should be allowed to die. The student nurses demonstrated considerable insight into contemporary nursing issues and were ready to act as patient advocates. Professional responsibility demands that good nurses advocate strongly for patients’ choices. (shrink)

Patient advocacy has been a topic of much discussion in the nursing literature for a number of decades. Ambiguities remain, however, concerning definitions of advocacy in nursing. This qualitative grounded theory-type study aimed to inquire into the meaning of patient advocacy from Iranian nurses' perspective. A purposive sample of 24 nurses (staff nurses, head nurses and supervisors) working in a large university hospital in Tehran was used. Data were collected using in-depth semistructured interviews and reflective diaries kept by the participants. (...) The data were analyzed using elements of Strauss and Corbin's' approach. Advocacy was defined by the participants as: informing and educating; valuing and respecting; supporting; protecting; and promoting continuity of care for patients. The participants also believed that advocacy could take place only if there was respect for patients' individuality and their inherent human dignity. Many of the descriptions given by the participants are consistent with previous research in this area and represent a comprehensive account of their perceptions of patient advocacy. (shrink)