Questions of Relevance

Any discipline is best contextualized when viewed in systems that address multi-faceted operations wherein metaparadigms interlock. Too much technicality, too much ideals, an exaggeration of what ought to be depending on urgency are thought processes that are doomed to fail given our universal limitations. In the same wavelength, substandardization, when subjected to critical circumstances, promises and achieves nothing. As we transcend the everyday schemes of nursing practice, the monotony is delirious. Shaken by the feel of stagnation, we are caught in limbo, generalizing the specifics, degrading what ought to be experienced unique by those we care. Truly, to learn the science of what makes us competent is nothing short of trivial when unpaired with something philosophical. The hard facts may settle in our consciousness, however, forces overcoming influential parameters classified unscientific push us to be characters of honor whose powerful stance is to weather tests of circumstance. Philosophy moves us, until someday, the lines of these theories blur. It is our understanding of the truth, the implications of our actions to the reality that may not always seem, and our sincerest passion for altruism that shall unify them all.

  

Veering not only in what must be done, emphasizing what ought to be and paving for an avenue to realize goals set, it is only fitting to laud the foundress of our discipline. Our local status quo bit the nursing craze of the mid to late 2000, and the result saw the mushrooming of tertiary schools offering a formal course. Averaging 40% passing rate every biannual licensure examination, one cannot help but doubt the competitive standards our accrediting bodies mandate for these institutions to operate. The ill-effects of commercialization, an educator’s substandard appraisal of what is considered competent, a student’s lack of resolve, textbook emphasis on research that never gets to immerse in reality contribute to the degradation of the founding ideas of how we should treat our profession. One concrete scenario mirroring Nightingale’s observation is poor assessment skills. We frontline the terrains, and in a similar context, one could lose a battle if we lose sight of a critical factor that determines an upheaval’s fate. Assessment must be emphasized, underlined, and understood. This is the beginning of our familiar cycle, yet we do not upgrade it or categorize signs for judgment to be more precise, more valid. We give up too easily. We patronize the idea of seniority. We act accordingly, but too much reservation is never warranted in a society that sees loopholes in every surface of every corner. Chutzpah is what we lack, which explains our disillusionment about the effects of research, or upgrading important facets of care, or plastering leakage in the connections of our metaparadigms.

Respect and other universal values delineating a person from other organisms need no theory. It is naturally possessed, and its sincere application is not mired by explicit direction. Nowadays however, we find a sense of affirmation if we pattern our actions from the actions of our senior. Compensating for our lack of experience, we hide under the skin of convention, and wrongfully wire our interactions for what we thought are appropriate. We may have a structure, but its effectiveness is questionable. For example, patience is an integral parcel of interaction and if circumstances overwhelm our ability to compose, we shorten what must be individualized. Ignorance of these models encourages our false practice. Therapeutic communication is then built on shaken concrete, hence, therapy is incomplete.

Our country’s scenario is difficult. It is never easy to categorize what affects a client given the overwhelming instances. One can never determine the depth of an issue and whether, ceteris paribus, you have done something to at least deliver a palliative solution. If we must adapt, we do because we are wired for it. Sometimes, I feel, the best interjection is a practical advice, which transcends the usual full disclosure of feelings. The lines of communication are vulnerable, receptive to sound judgment, but breaks down when overwhelmed by qualitative and quantitative constraints. To some extent, one feels, security within the caregiver is elementary before one is tenable to strengthen the lines of enabling others to cope for their misfortunes. It is difficult because we deal with a myriad of defects, and it cannot be helped sometimes that, in order to shield ourselves from the vacuum of misery, we choose to be numbed. For our miseries are enough and the world rests too much on our shoulders, we often doubt our capability to be of a pillar for the wounded.

In our country, it is a pity that one can only hear philosophies underscoring our practice in the academy. Our motivations become distorted, yet valid in our quest for self-preservation. It is rooted in evolution that we are primed to exist, and to arrange the best possible conditions we can sustain our existence. Seemingly, our actions are “frameworked” by the principle of subsistence, which may explain our ignorance, our inability to appreciate, accept, and practice according to a theoretical framework.

Yes, like any other disciplines built on a theoretical framework, ours is still growing. Soon, modern frameworks shall arise from the dictates of a modern society, building on what was earlier built. The ideas of the yesteryears may prove limited in the application of a changing society, so we must grow along with it. I speak for a time also motivated by a need to preserve oneself. How we incorporate what ought to be when challenged by quantitative parameters is yet to be figured. How we respond to the limitations of an undersupplied society must be dealt with. A lot of questions arise, and these theories do not deliver a definitive period by which we stop looking for answers and settle our practice into what is established as true. The essence of growing should be felt, and not just plastered in books. A tree’s purpose is only half-served if its fruits will not be enjoyed by those who partake in it.