- Email: [email protected]
Stand shows AORN strength
indicated that ANA wished to continue discussion with AORN on certification. At the 1975 Congress, AORN’s House of Delegates had voted to collaborate with ANAs certification for excellence program. With the announcement of the new certification, the AORN Board of Directors decided not to proceed with joint certification at this time. For those of you, probably an overwhelming majority, who are lost in the complexities of the new certification, the program provides two mechanisms “to identify and recognize nurses for professional achievement and excellence in practice.”
Editor’s note: In her “President’s message” in the September Journal, Barba Edwards discussed the American Nurses’ Association’s (ANA) change in its certification program. She dealt with the events that led up to the change and some of the issues raised by the “new” certification. She asked members who “have an urge to get it off your mind” to write to her, and the letters of some of those appear in this column. We want to present both sides of the issue, but the letters President Edwards has received to date primarily support her views. We would like to hear some other views. The new certification,,announced publicly at the ANA Convention in Atlantic City in June, brought heated protest from the delegates. After several hours of debate in the House, President Rosamond Gabrielson stated, “It is obvious that certification and the new approach have disturbed the House of Delegates and members of ANA greatly.” She indicated that the question of certification would go back to the ANA Divisions on Practice. As of mid-October, there was no news from ANA on certification. Jean Quigley, program coordinator for certification, said that the executive committees of the Divisions on Practice would be meeting Oct 28 to 29, and she expected they would consider whether or not to go ahead with the American College of Nursing Practice. When budget allocations were decided, she expected the five divisions to review the status of certification. She also
To clarify one point of confusion, you do not need to have a master’s degree, or any degree for that matter, to qualify for certification for competence. You must be a registered nurse with two years of practice. However, to achieve diplomate status in the American College of Nursing Practice, you must be prepared at the master’s level and meet additional criteria. For more complete details of the new certification, as well as the old, consult the August AORN Journal, p 203-206.
Moratorium applauded
Stand shows AORN strength
I totally agree with AORN’s moratorium on certification until ANA changes the new concept or until the delegates vote on it at Congress. To be quite frank, I am angered that ANA could change the concept of certification without any input from AORN, yet still depend on our financial support. Thank you for acting on behalf of the members of AORN. Judy Choate, RN surgery supervisor Eskaton-Colusa Healthcare Center Colusa, Calif
I would like to take this opportunity to commend you for the stand you took on the “certification practice” at the American Nurses’ Association Convention in Atlantic City on behalf of AORN members.
1114
1. Certification, attesting to competency in designated areas of practice, including competency as a clinical nurse specialist. 2. Diplomate status in a new American College of Nursing Practice for certified nurses who meet additional criteria demonstrating excellence in practice.
I hope this proved to ANA that AORN is a strong organization that can and will stand on its own two feet and be heard.
I feel your stand on this issue will serve as a good promotion tactic for us to use to encourage RNs working in the OR to join our Association to make it even stronger. I believe that you have proved that we do have
AORN Journal, December 1976, Vol24, No 6
people serving as officers of our Association who do and will stand up for its members. I am confident that this issue alone will help us increase our membership tremendously. I plan to use it for promotional purposes to encourage all RNs to join our Association so they too can be as proud of the Association as I am. Jean Huffstetler, RN operating room supervisor Cleveland Memorial Hospital Shelby, NC
Where is the patient? It was interesting to read the “President’s message” in the September Journal. My opposition to ANA is almost fanatical, and I did not feel that anything I had to say would be taken seriously, until I read your column. First, let’s get nursing into perspective. Over the past few years, there has been a movement to certify nurses so that an excellence of care through a specified program of continuing education could be achieved. This excellence of care was to be maintained by continuing education through a nurse’s entire career. Then, we began to hear about certification for the specialist with the insistence on nurses achieving an MS in nursing. Whether we like it or not, in a few short years to be a nurse, you will have to have a degree. To be a supervisor, you will have to have a master’s. To be a teacher, you will have to have a master’s or even a doctorate. Where does that leave the patient? In the hands of the licensed vocational nurse, the aide, and the orderly. I am a diploma graduate working on a degree in allied health majoring in education with a minor in management. I am not against the degree nurse. I feel that I was adequately trained in the diploma program, and I have always thought that continuing education or the “learning process” as it used to be called went on for your entire career. The patient comes first I was taught; you must keep up with your profession I was told. Education is vital, but the patient needs an RN. Her education, her experience, her expertise are absolutely essential. I have observed nurses who are so tied up in their education, in their assertion of their individu-
1116
ality, in not being subservient to the physician that their obligation to the patient is forgotten. We’ve got to keep the person in your patient first when we think about standards. Please quit putting all the emphasis on education and more education (formal) and taking the nurses away from the units. More and more, ANA and the National League for Nursing are requiring higher education to function as a professional, and more practicing nurses are becoming discouraged. Nurses better become more informed and more willing to speak out for themselves. I wish fervently that we could hear what the patient has to say. I sincerely want our profession to grow, never to become stagnant, but I want to spend my professional career or the majority of it with what I care about, the patient. Barbara Kay Howell, RN surgery Brackenridge Hospital Austin, Tex
No substitute for second physician Virginia’s passage of a law to allow nurses to first assist in surgery has prompted my first letter to the editor. I have tried to weigh the issues as I see them and have decided that I would be firmly against such a policy for the following reasons. 1. There is already a shortage of OR nurses. Staffing another position would only make this critical. Staffing another position that takes us away from nursing leaves us open to the criticism that nurses, per se, are not necessary at all. 2. There is the ever-present question of liability. Most insurance policies would have to be rewritten to cover those duties. If we are only to ”assist,” who would finish the operation if the surgeon could not? The law, as written, has a good chance of conflicting with the medical practice act; therefore, we could not be assured of even its protection, if it were tested in a court of law. 3. There is no education program established for this position, and, if established, who would set and enforce the standards? I
AORN Journal, December 1976, Vo124, No 6
Editor’s note: In her “President’s message” in the September Journal, Barba Edwards discussed the American Nurses’ Association’s (ANA) change in its certification program. She dealt with the events that led up to the change and some of the issues raised by the “new” certification. She asked members who “have an urge to get it off your mind” to write to her, and the letters of some of those appear in this column. We want to present both sides of the issue, but the letters President Edwards has received to date primarily support her views. We would like to hear some other views. The new certification,,announced publicly at the ANA Convention in Atlantic City in June, brought heated protest from the delegates. After several hours of debate in the House, President Rosamond Gabrielson stated, “It is obvious that certification and the new approach have disturbed the House of Delegates and members of ANA greatly.” She indicated that the question of certification would go back to the ANA Divisions on Practice. As of mid-October, there was no news from ANA on certification. Jean Quigley, program coordinator for certification, said that the executive committees of the Divisions on Practice would be meeting Oct 28 to 29, and she expected they would consider whether or not to go ahead with the American College of Nursing Practice. When budget allocations were decided, she expected the five divisions to review the status of certification. She also
To clarify one point of confusion, you do not need to have a master’s degree, or any degree for that matter, to qualify for certification for competence. You must be a registered nurse with two years of practice. However, to achieve diplomate status in the American College of Nursing Practice, you must be prepared at the master’s level and meet additional criteria. For more complete details of the new certification, as well as the old, consult the August AORN Journal, p 203-206.
Moratorium applauded
Stand shows AORN strength
I totally agree with AORN’s moratorium on certification until ANA changes the new concept or until the delegates vote on it at Congress. To be quite frank, I am angered that ANA could change the concept of certification without any input from AORN, yet still depend on our financial support. Thank you for acting on behalf of the members of AORN. Judy Choate, RN surgery supervisor Eskaton-Colusa Healthcare Center Colusa, Calif
I would like to take this opportunity to commend you for the stand you took on the “certification practice” at the American Nurses’ Association Convention in Atlantic City on behalf of AORN members.
1114
1. Certification, attesting to competency in designated areas of practice, including competency as a clinical nurse specialist. 2. Diplomate status in a new American College of Nursing Practice for certified nurses who meet additional criteria demonstrating excellence in practice.
I hope this proved to ANA that AORN is a strong organization that can and will stand on its own two feet and be heard.
I feel your stand on this issue will serve as a good promotion tactic for us to use to encourage RNs working in the OR to join our Association to make it even stronger. I believe that you have proved that we do have
AORN Journal, December 1976, Vol24, No 6
people serving as officers of our Association who do and will stand up for its members. I am confident that this issue alone will help us increase our membership tremendously. I plan to use it for promotional purposes to encourage all RNs to join our Association so they too can be as proud of the Association as I am. Jean Huffstetler, RN operating room supervisor Cleveland Memorial Hospital Shelby, NC
Where is the patient? It was interesting to read the “President’s message” in the September Journal. My opposition to ANA is almost fanatical, and I did not feel that anything I had to say would be taken seriously, until I read your column. First, let’s get nursing into perspective. Over the past few years, there has been a movement to certify nurses so that an excellence of care through a specified program of continuing education could be achieved. This excellence of care was to be maintained by continuing education through a nurse’s entire career. Then, we began to hear about certification for the specialist with the insistence on nurses achieving an MS in nursing. Whether we like it or not, in a few short years to be a nurse, you will have to have a degree. To be a supervisor, you will have to have a master’s. To be a teacher, you will have to have a master’s or even a doctorate. Where does that leave the patient? In the hands of the licensed vocational nurse, the aide, and the orderly. I am a diploma graduate working on a degree in allied health majoring in education with a minor in management. I am not against the degree nurse. I feel that I was adequately trained in the diploma program, and I have always thought that continuing education or the “learning process” as it used to be called went on for your entire career. The patient comes first I was taught; you must keep up with your profession I was told. Education is vital, but the patient needs an RN. Her education, her experience, her expertise are absolutely essential. I have observed nurses who are so tied up in their education, in their assertion of their individu-
1116
ality, in not being subservient to the physician that their obligation to the patient is forgotten. We’ve got to keep the person in your patient first when we think about standards. Please quit putting all the emphasis on education and more education (formal) and taking the nurses away from the units. More and more, ANA and the National League for Nursing are requiring higher education to function as a professional, and more practicing nurses are becoming discouraged. Nurses better become more informed and more willing to speak out for themselves. I wish fervently that we could hear what the patient has to say. I sincerely want our profession to grow, never to become stagnant, but I want to spend my professional career or the majority of it with what I care about, the patient. Barbara Kay Howell, RN surgery Brackenridge Hospital Austin, Tex
No substitute for second physician Virginia’s passage of a law to allow nurses to first assist in surgery has prompted my first letter to the editor. I have tried to weigh the issues as I see them and have decided that I would be firmly against such a policy for the following reasons. 1. There is already a shortage of OR nurses. Staffing another position would only make this critical. Staffing another position that takes us away from nursing leaves us open to the criticism that nurses, per se, are not necessary at all. 2. There is the ever-present question of liability. Most insurance policies would have to be rewritten to cover those duties. If we are only to ”assist,” who would finish the operation if the surgeon could not? The law, as written, has a good chance of conflicting with the medical practice act; therefore, we could not be assured of even its protection, if it were tested in a court of law. 3. There is no education program established for this position, and, if established, who would set and enforce the standards? I
AORN Journal, December 1976, Vo124, No 6