- Email: [email protected]
A fresh look
ARCHIVES
OF
PSYCHIATRIC NURSING Vol. XV, No. 1
February 2001
EDITORIAL
A Fresh Look
Y
OU MAY HAVE noticed that we have a new look for the New Year. Yes, our cover is a bit more chic—richer tones of blue, less of gray, a plusher image. Of course, our old cover had become associated with our established reputation for being a scholarly clinical journal. The cover was simple and understated, making no attempt to compete with the content and substance of the journal. I wasn’t sure that there was anything wrong with that image. I rather liked the idea that this “book” could not be judged by its cover, that one had to read it from the inside out to make a judgment. However, people professing to be wiser than me about such things argued that the old cover contributed to the impression that we were stodgy and inaccessible, appealing only to a certain elite within the field, thus unwittingly denying others beneficial access to the pearls of wisdom within. I confess that I am of the old school, believing that image and reputation must be earned not manufactured through some public-relations ploy. I’m not totally convinced that a new cover will necessarily bring new readers (although it might bring new advertisers). But, I agreed to a fresh look, as long as it didn’t involve pictures, bright colors, or other gimmicks designed to grab attention, whether deserved or not. Now, let me make another confession. I like the idea of appealing to a certain elite within the field. Sitting on my credenza is an old (1972) Random House Dictionary of the English Language, signed by Virginia Henderson. It was hers and she used it often. She passed it along to me when she gave up her office. Now, I use it often and consider the
definitions in it to be twice validated— once by Random House and once by Virginia Henderson. Elite is defined as “the choice or best of anything considered collectively . . . a group of persons exercising the major share of authority or influence within a larger organization . . . representing the most choice or select—the best.” Under those terms, dear reader, I am pleased to declare anyone who reads Archives of Psychiatric Nursing to be among the psychiatric mental health nursing elite. I also declare that as part of the elite you are obligated to take greater responsibility within your spheres of influence. In keeping with the new cover and the title of this editorial, I challenge you to take a fresh look at the issues that you consider important to the field. What will it take to move those issues to the forefront of clinical, educational, and policy deliberations? What new insights can you offer? What plans do you have for submitting a manuscript? What constructive critique can you contribute to the ideas expressed in this or previous issues of APN? When is the last time you wrote a Letter to the Editor? Who do you know who should be a contributing author and how will you encourage them? How can you help get this journal into the hands of those who should be reading it? More importantly, what are the old issues that need a fresh look? Are there some issues that need to be put aside to make room for more important Copyright 䊚 2001 by W.B. Saunders Company 0883-9417/01/1501-0001$35.00/0 doi:10.1053/apnu.2001.22709
Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, Vol. XV, No. 1 (February), 2001: pp 1-2
1
2
considerations? Have you become so specialized in your interests that you fail to recognize common policy considerations that cut across the field? Should the field be redirected—that is, should we be looking more outside than inside? What are the clinical issues that are begging for attention? Which populations are most vulnerable to practice and policy changes? What are the practical solutions to problems of recruitment and retention in the field? What difference does it make, anyway? How do all of these questions relate to Archives of Psychiatric Nursing? Among other things, your answers to them should influence what’s inside this journal. A fresh new look at what matters in the field should be reflected in these pages. Ironically, a new cover has little influence over content. Neither an editor nor a publisher can dramatically change the content of an established journal without the cooperation of readers and authors. I am not suggesting that we need dramatic changes in APN. I am hinting, as I often have at the start of yet another volume year, that the journal and its readership are mature enough that there should be more
JUDITH B. KRAUSS
dialogue represented in the Letters to the Editor pages. There should be more manuscripts that provide commentary on previously published work. If the reputation of this journal is deserved then where else, if not here, should there be evidence of lively engagement in the field and the important clinical issues of the day? So, we have a fresh new cover. I hope you like it. Whether you do or not, I hope we hear from you. Frankly, I’m less interested in your opinion about the cover. I want your opinion about what really matters, the content. Although I would welcome your editorial critique, I would be even more grateful for your critique of the ideas expressed in these pages. In the end, it is not my gratitude that should motivate you. It is, instead, the future of the discipline, the patients you care for, and the mental health system itself. Put on your glasses and take a fresh new look. Then, share it with the rest of us!
Judith B. Krauss Editor
OF
PSYCHIATRIC NURSING Vol. XV, No. 1
February 2001
EDITORIAL
A Fresh Look
Y
OU MAY HAVE noticed that we have a new look for the New Year. Yes, our cover is a bit more chic—richer tones of blue, less of gray, a plusher image. Of course, our old cover had become associated with our established reputation for being a scholarly clinical journal. The cover was simple and understated, making no attempt to compete with the content and substance of the journal. I wasn’t sure that there was anything wrong with that image. I rather liked the idea that this “book” could not be judged by its cover, that one had to read it from the inside out to make a judgment. However, people professing to be wiser than me about such things argued that the old cover contributed to the impression that we were stodgy and inaccessible, appealing only to a certain elite within the field, thus unwittingly denying others beneficial access to the pearls of wisdom within. I confess that I am of the old school, believing that image and reputation must be earned not manufactured through some public-relations ploy. I’m not totally convinced that a new cover will necessarily bring new readers (although it might bring new advertisers). But, I agreed to a fresh look, as long as it didn’t involve pictures, bright colors, or other gimmicks designed to grab attention, whether deserved or not. Now, let me make another confession. I like the idea of appealing to a certain elite within the field. Sitting on my credenza is an old (1972) Random House Dictionary of the English Language, signed by Virginia Henderson. It was hers and she used it often. She passed it along to me when she gave up her office. Now, I use it often and consider the
definitions in it to be twice validated— once by Random House and once by Virginia Henderson. Elite is defined as “the choice or best of anything considered collectively . . . a group of persons exercising the major share of authority or influence within a larger organization . . . representing the most choice or select—the best.” Under those terms, dear reader, I am pleased to declare anyone who reads Archives of Psychiatric Nursing to be among the psychiatric mental health nursing elite. I also declare that as part of the elite you are obligated to take greater responsibility within your spheres of influence. In keeping with the new cover and the title of this editorial, I challenge you to take a fresh look at the issues that you consider important to the field. What will it take to move those issues to the forefront of clinical, educational, and policy deliberations? What new insights can you offer? What plans do you have for submitting a manuscript? What constructive critique can you contribute to the ideas expressed in this or previous issues of APN? When is the last time you wrote a Letter to the Editor? Who do you know who should be a contributing author and how will you encourage them? How can you help get this journal into the hands of those who should be reading it? More importantly, what are the old issues that need a fresh look? Are there some issues that need to be put aside to make room for more important Copyright 䊚 2001 by W.B. Saunders Company 0883-9417/01/1501-0001$35.00/0 doi:10.1053/apnu.2001.22709
Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, Vol. XV, No. 1 (February), 2001: pp 1-2
1
2
considerations? Have you become so specialized in your interests that you fail to recognize common policy considerations that cut across the field? Should the field be redirected—that is, should we be looking more outside than inside? What are the clinical issues that are begging for attention? Which populations are most vulnerable to practice and policy changes? What are the practical solutions to problems of recruitment and retention in the field? What difference does it make, anyway? How do all of these questions relate to Archives of Psychiatric Nursing? Among other things, your answers to them should influence what’s inside this journal. A fresh new look at what matters in the field should be reflected in these pages. Ironically, a new cover has little influence over content. Neither an editor nor a publisher can dramatically change the content of an established journal without the cooperation of readers and authors. I am not suggesting that we need dramatic changes in APN. I am hinting, as I often have at the start of yet another volume year, that the journal and its readership are mature enough that there should be more
JUDITH B. KRAUSS
dialogue represented in the Letters to the Editor pages. There should be more manuscripts that provide commentary on previously published work. If the reputation of this journal is deserved then where else, if not here, should there be evidence of lively engagement in the field and the important clinical issues of the day? So, we have a fresh new cover. I hope you like it. Whether you do or not, I hope we hear from you. Frankly, I’m less interested in your opinion about the cover. I want your opinion about what really matters, the content. Although I would welcome your editorial critique, I would be even more grateful for your critique of the ideas expressed in these pages. In the end, it is not my gratitude that should motivate you. It is, instead, the future of the discipline, the patients you care for, and the mental health system itself. Put on your glasses and take a fresh new look. Then, share it with the rest of us!
Judith B. Krauss Editor