[NPInfo] CACC and AACN-READ BETWEEN THE LINES

Sat Apr 5 13:45:40 PDT 2008

thanks you for a wonderful response.
The "ivory tower ' syndrome strikes again.
What do educators know about the real world?

In a message dated 4/5/2008 4:02:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  mfnp at cox.net 
writes:

I will  again emphasize that those who support or had a hand in this 
should be  very proud. You have undone 20+ years of work by thousands of 
people and  have set the stage for relinquishing of control to another 
physician  controlled organization. You have also added another 
regulatory, or maybe  several, to advanced practice for NPs. So now you 
can sit back, and we all  can await the consequences of the actions. The 
timing is also great when  the U.S. is entering one of the worst 
recessions per current economists,  and all signs are exactly the same as 
just before the depression, i.e.,  foreclosures, savings, "margin calls".
For all the "fruits of your labor",  you can sit back, watch as NPs are 
forced into more debt, less pay and no  further recognition, and you can 
use your new title of "Dr.", so long as  it is not in a clinical setting 
where it could be mistaken to be  interpreted as a physician, which most 
States outlaw. You have also  managed to add another test to pass, and 
what does it give  you?

Wouldn't those that have spent the time and effort to gain a  doctorate 
and be tested by a physician run organization have better spent  your 
time and money and return to medical school? It would have been  cheaper, 
probably less money and in the end you could have taken this same  test, 
as the previously posted article documents, and then you could have  also 
gained the same status of a physician and your direction would be  clear. 
Those supporting this should be given awards for screwing up so  much, by 
so few. Give yourselves a "pat on the back" for your work, and  the rest 
of us "pee ons" should bow in your grace and thank you! Who says  "nurses 
don't eat their young", as well as we are our worst  enemies?

Michael B Marks, FNP wrote:
> Received this from one of  my groups re the nursing schools' take on this.
>
> ----- Original  Message ----- 
> From: Reilly, Helene 
> Sent: Friday, April 04,  2008 3:59 PM
> Subject: DNP Article "Making Room for 'Dr.  Nurse'"
>
>
>  
>
>   
>
>  
>
> From: Lowery, Bobby  
>
>
>
> FYI
>
>   
>
>
>  
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  From: Beth Aronson [mailto:baronson at aacn.nche.edu]
> Sent: Fri 4/4/2008  2:52 PM
> To: Brown, Sylvia
> Subject: [olnnetwork] AACN Response  to WSJ Article on DNP
>
> AACN Members - 
>
> In  response to the recent article in the Wall Street Journal titled 
"Making Room  for Dr. Nurse" (April 2, 2008; D1), AACN would like to clarify the  
organization's affiliation with the Council for the Advancement of  
Comprehensive Care (CACC) and our understanding of the new DNP certification  exam. The 
article may be accessed online at  
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120710036831882059.html.
>
>   AACN has been aware that the DNP certification was under development by 
the  CACC, and we learned via email last week that the certification exam would 
be  administered for the first time in November 2008.  In conversations with  
CACC representatives, AACN reinforced our commitment to supporting the  
advanced practice consensus process, which we have been facilitating for three  
years to bring clarity to the issues of Advanced Practice Registered Nursing  
(APRN) education, accreditation, certification, and licensure.  CACC  
representatives assured us that the DNP certification exam would not be used  for 
regulatory purposes which would conflict with the work of the consensus  group.
>
>  Further, it is AACN's understanding that this  exam will be voluntary and 
only be available to DNP graduates who are prepared  as APRNs and have 
received certification and licensure from the appropriate  groups. This exam is an 
independent development effort meant to test a unique  body of knowledge 
regarding practice and may be used by APRNs who wish to  validate that they have 
acquired knowledge reflective of the demands of  clinical interventions at the 
advanced level.  AACN has agreed to rejoin  the CACC in an effort to monitor 
their work and determine if the exam will  further efforts to clarify APRN scope 
of practice authority and assess its  usefulness for ensuring competence to 
practice.
>
>  AACN  also has prepared the Letter to the Editor (see below) which 
hopefully will be  published to clarify some of the issues and concerns raised by the 
article on  the DNP. 
>
>  LETTER TO THE EDITOR
>
>  In  response to the article "Making Room for Dr. Nurse" (April 2, 2008; 
D1), the  American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) was pleased to see 
the  national spotlight cast on the rapid emergence of Doctor of Nursing 
Practice  (DNP) programs and the importance of doctorally-prepared nurses in the  
healthcare system. However, the article does not clarify that nursing and  
medicine are distinct health disciplines with clinicians assuming different  roles 
and meeting different practice expectations. DNP programs prepare nurses  for 
the highest level of nursing practice; they do not prepare nurses to be  
physicians. Transitioning to the DNP will not alter the current scope of  practice 
for advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) as outlined in each  state's 
Nurse Practice Act.
>
>  Further, the title of "Dr."  is common to many disciplines and is not the 
domain of any one group of health  professionals. Many nurses currently hold 
doctoral degrees and are called  "Dr.," which is similar to how other clinical 
experts are addressed, including  pharmacists, dentists, and podiatrists. In 
all likelihood, DNP-prepared nurses  will retain their specialist titles, which 
means that nurse practitioners will  continue to be called nurse 
practitioners.
>
>  To reduce  confusion, AACN recommends that the credentials of all 
clinicians be  identified for the public both verbally and on name badges.  DNPs 
should  clearly display their credentials to ensure that patients understand their  
preparation as a nursing provider, just as many APRNs, physicians, and other  
clinicians currently do.
>
>  Nursing is answering the call  of the Institute of Medicine, Joint 
Commission, and other authorities to  reconceptualize nursing education by preparing 
APRNs for an evolving practice.  Doctorally prepared nurses are not "hybrid 
practitioners", but rather nurses  with an education level consistent with role 
expectations and on par with  other health professionals.  
>
> C. Fay  Raines
>
> President
>
> American Association of  Colleges of Nursing
>
> One Dupont Circle, Suite  530
>
> Washington, D.C.  20036
>
>   
>
> Hi all,
>
>    
> Please see the  provocative Wall Street Journal article "Making Room for 
'Dr. Nurse'" written  by columnist, Laura Landro. This information was forwarded 
by Dr. Elaine  Scott.  Fee free to share with others as you wish.
>
>   
>
>  http://online.wsj.com/article/the_informed_patient.html
>
>
>   
>
> Bobby
>
>  
>
> Bobby Lowery,  MN, FNP-BC
>
> Clinical Assistant Professor & Clinical Site  Placement Coordinator
>
> ECU College of Nursing
>
>  Primary Care Nurse Practitioner Programs
>
> 3185L Health Sciences  Building
>
> Health Sciences Building
>
> Greenville,  NC 27858-4353
>
> Cell (Preferred):  252-916-2391  
>
> Office PH:  252-744-6363
>
> Email:   Lowerybo at ecu.edu
>
>  
>
>
>  
>  _______________________________________________
> NPInfo mailing  list
> NPInfo at nurse.net
>  http://lists.nurse.net/mailman/listinfo/npinfo
>  *****************************
>  .
>

_______________________________________________
NPInfo  mailing  list
NPInfo at nurse.net
http://lists.nurse.net/mailman/listinfo/npinfo
*****************************

Be kinder  than necessary, everyone you meet is fighting some kind of  battle.

**************Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.    
  (http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)