[NPInfo] re: DNP thread

Wed Apr 9 18:15:36 PDT 2008

 I've come into this thread mid way since I just recently joined the list serve.? I have been a paramedic for 8 years and finally decided to become a NP.? I start the entry level ACNP at MGH IHP in the fall.? While taking grad level nursing courses in the past year, I've been pretty excited to start this new journey.? As I learn more of the current tide of politics within the field, I'm beginning to become a bit apprehensive.? The clinical opportunities remain very enticing, however I worry that after graduation I'll only have been working about 4 years before the 2015 DNP requirement.? I fully understand that I will be "gradfathered" and not required to become a DNP.? On the other hand I worry that with just a few years under my belt I will be less marketable than the newly mass produced DNPs. Is this a legitimate concern?? In what seems to be a great time to become a NP because of the myriad of opportunity and demand, I'm concerned that it may be the wrong time to become a masters prepared NP.?? Any insight??? I would probably become a DNP at some point but I don't like the idea that I need to in order to stay competitive.? I'd like to think that this substantial monetary initial investment is worth it.

Thanks for your thoughts,

Gino Paolucci, BS, NREMTP

-----Original Message-----
From: Calif NP <np at c-zone.net>
To: NP Info <npinfo at nurse.net>
Sent: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 8:26 am
Subject: Re: [NPInfo] re: DNP thread

At least in most recent and historical examples of Dictatorships it has
always been pretty apparent whose interests were being represented.  In
American Nursing though, one must always investigate
folks/politicians/academics'  hidden agendas, follow the money, see what
interests are being served by ever-increasing academic
requirements/certifications/etc etc.   This degree and credential inflation
is a sad and costly joke which does not serve either the public's interests,
does not improve the health care delivery system, nor does it serve the
interests of nursing either.  You can take a look at the requirements of
some organizations as ANCC to keep a particular NP specialty certification
current, and yes it looks like a good thing-  But, the good Boards of
Registered Nursing in the more advanced States already do this! Why does a
national certification business have to exist to duplicate or echo what the
better States have already done- establish Nursing standards which make
sense for their individual State's needs. Standards of professional
excellence, public safety, sensible requirements, are all in place already.
If a smaller state can't determine its nursing standards they could very
easily write into their regulations that they follow whatever nursing
standards exist for RNs and NPs current in the State of California!   Again,
NPs are doing well in CA, without national certification ( a real loss of
State and nursing profession autonomy!), without degree inflation, and all
of these academic imposed games playing.
Degree and certification requirements imposed by Medicare, or individual
states who won't step up to the plate and establish their own regulations
for NPs/Advanced Practice Nurses are a big part of the problem- all of which
is pushed just that much further in the wrong direction by others with
vested interests in certifications/degree mills/so-called analysts/etc

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <mfnp at cox.net>
To: <npinfo at nurse.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: [NPInfo] re: DNP thread

> Isn't that why you took up running? There is no top level, because of
> the same adage, "those that can do, will do it, and those who can not
> teach". If you look at the system, and the more recent history of
> Nursing, you can see that those involved in Academia are the one's who
> control the levels, and they keep raising the bar. So as long as these
> conditions continue, change is impossible.
>
> Nursing is not a democracy, it is closer to a dictatorship, where
> decisions and policies are made from those that control the system. If
> they are not happy, they change things. They are also the ones that have
> controlled Nursing for so long, because if you can not get whatever
> education is required to enter the profession, you can not go anywhere.
> Some physicians do full time academics, but they are a small minority in
> comparison to the percentage in Nursing, and, except for
> specializations, their levels of training begin and end at the entry
> level, while Nursing keeps raising the bar and one has to question to
> whose benefit?
>
> Physicians have uniformity that Nursing has not even come close to
> meeting, nor do I believe they want to. There are how many medical
> schools or nursing schools, and the number of nursing schools keeps
> growing? Also, Nursing has never learned that "putting the cart before
> the horse" does not work, but the educational systems have to keep
> upping the stakes or they will be out of both a position and need.
>
> This is unique to nursing and nursing alone. For example, if you enter
> "education" to become a teacher, you may incur step increases in pay
> when you finish a program or advanced degree, but, while administration
> being the highest level of the field, would like doctoral prepared
> candidates, it is not required. Even when you do reach the highest
> level, it is more political than educationally oriented, which can not
> be said for Nursing. So we have all allowed the system to be controlled
> by the very system that allowed us to enter the profession.
>
> What that translates into is that unless the control is maintained by
> the same gate keepers that allow one to enter, they will probably always
> keep raising the bar, because it means their jobs, and many could not
> work in the field, or want to, just keep in academia. This has
> perpetuated itself, and I do not see any changes, or any reason that the
> "leaders" want a change. Therefore, we are not fully consulted of
> proposed changes, if at all, and those that can, will make the bar
> higher and higher because "they can"! Marty
>
> Diana Galler wrote:
> > Unfortunately, I doubt that the DNP degree will ever be considered a
"terminal" degree for NPs... it will be entry level only with the PhD and
DNSc still the "ultimate" degrees.  Already I've heard discussions of
DNP-to-PhD programs and it just makes me want to spit!!! I don't think I
will ever hit the top rung in nursing in this lifetime since they keep
dangling that darn carrot further and further away just as I get closer to
nabbing it.
> >   Dena Galler
> >
> >
> >   I agree that the move to DNP is not the magic wand that will
immediately
> > change reimbursement, respect, access to care, etc..... but from a
> > professional standpoint it is a needed move to show a terminal practice
> > degree for the profession.
> >
> >
> >
> > Mary Elizabeth
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> > *****************************
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NPInfo mailing list
> NPInfo at nurse.net
> http://lists.nurse.net/mailman/listinfo/npinfo
> *****************************
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.10/1367 - Release Date: 4/9/2008
7:10 AM
>

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