Background: Compassionate care is an international priority of healthcare professionals. There is little understanding about how workplace issues impact provision of compassionate care in nursing practice. Therefore, it is important to address the workplace issues and organizational factors which may hinder compassionate care delivery within nursing practice. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore workplace and organizational barriers to compassionate care from the nurses’ perspective. Research design: The study used a qualitative exploratory design, and data were analyzed by (...) conventional content analysis. Participants and research context: A total of 15 nurses working in different fields of nursing were recruited from four hospitals at northwest of Iran. Participants were selected by purposive sampling. Semistructured interviews were conducted for data collection. Ethical consideration: Ethical approval of this study was gained from the Ethical Review Board of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences. Findings: The main theme which emerged from data analysis was “unsupportive organizational culture.” This theme had two main categories including “excessive workload alongside inadequate staffing” and “the lack of value on compassionate care.” Discussion: Organizational barriers to development of compassionate in clinical practice were identified in this study. A closer examination of these barriers is required to move compassionate practice from an individual responsibility to a collective responsibility that is owned and shared by organizations. Conclusion: For compassionate care to flourish, policy makers, managers, and healthcare providers must foster an organizational atmosphere conducive to compassionate care. (shrink)

Nursing codes of ethics and conduct are features of professional practice across the world, and in the UK, the regulator has recently consulted on and published a new code. Initially part of a professionalising agenda, nursing codes have recently come to represent a managerialist and disciplinary agenda and nursing can no longer be regarded as a self‐regulating profession. This paper argues that codes of ethics and codes of conduct are significantly different in form and function similar to the difference between (...) ethics and law in everyday life. Some codes successfully integrate these two functions within the same document, while others, principally the UK Code, conflate them resulting in an ambiguous document unable to fulfil its functions effectively. The paper analyses the differences between ethical‐codes and conduct‐codes by discussing titles, authorship, level, scope for disagreement, consequences of transgression, language and finally and possibly most importantly agent‐centeredness. It is argued that conduct‐codes cannot require nurses to be compassionate because compassion involves an emotional response. The concept of kindness provides a plausible alternative for conduct‐codes as it is possible to understand it solely in terms of acts. But if kindness is required in conduct‐codes, investigation and possible censure follows from its absence. Using examples it is argued that there are at last five possible accounts of the absence of kindness. As well as being potentially problematic for disciplinary panels, difficulty in understanding the features of blameworthy absence of kindness may challenge UK nurses who, following a recently introduced revalidation procedure, are required to reflect on their practice in relation to The Code. It is concluded that closer attention to metaethical concerns by code writers will better support the functions of their issuing organisations. (shrink)