Nursing advocacy and activism: A critical analysis of regulatory documents.

IF 2.9 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS Nursing Ethics Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1177/09697330241299525
Lydia Mainey, Sarah Richardson, Ryan Essex, Jessica Dillard-Wright
{"title":"Nursing advocacy and activism: A critical analysis of regulatory documents.","authors":"Lydia Mainey, Sarah Richardson, Ryan Essex, Jessica Dillard-Wright","doi":"10.1177/09697330241299525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Advocacy and activism are dynamic terms representing a spectrum of political action, aiming to achieve social or political change. The extent to which nursing advocacy and activism are legitimate nursing roles has been debated for around 50 years. Nursing regulatory documents, such as codes of conduct and professional standards, may provide direction to nurses on how they should act in the context of advocacy and activism.<b>Aim:</b> To explore what regulatory documents say about advocacy and activism, either explicitly or implicitly, and how they shape advocacy and activism.<b>Research design:</b> We used a Reflexive Qualitative Document Analysis approach with a Critical Feminist lens to analyse contemporary nursing regulatory documents from the USA, UK and Australia.<b>Ethical considerations:</b> This article has no human participants, and informed consent was not required.<b>Findings:</b> We identified eight nursing regulatory documents from the American Nurses Association, Nursing and Midwifery Council and Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia. We constructed two major themes that reveal how nursing advocacy and activism are conceived and shaped in regulatory documents. Theme 1, <i>Ideological arena</i> describes the gendered and neoliberal subtexts influencing advocacy and activism. Theme 2, <i>A five-pointed star</i>, describes the shape of advocacy and activism in the regulatory documents.<b>Conclusions:</b> Regulatory documents from the USA, UK and Australia support diplomatic nursing advocacy and activism for people, equity, ourselves (nurses), the profession and systems change. However, more oppositional and disruptive advocacy and activism are potentially constrained by gendered and neoliberal subtexts that depoliticise nurses' roles.</p>","PeriodicalId":49729,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"9697330241299525"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330241299525","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Advocacy and activism are dynamic terms representing a spectrum of political action, aiming to achieve social or political change. The extent to which nursing advocacy and activism are legitimate nursing roles has been debated for around 50 years. Nursing regulatory documents, such as codes of conduct and professional standards, may provide direction to nurses on how they should act in the context of advocacy and activism.Aim: To explore what regulatory documents say about advocacy and activism, either explicitly or implicitly, and how they shape advocacy and activism.Research design: We used a Reflexive Qualitative Document Analysis approach with a Critical Feminist lens to analyse contemporary nursing regulatory documents from the USA, UK and Australia.Ethical considerations: This article has no human participants, and informed consent was not required.Findings: We identified eight nursing regulatory documents from the American Nurses Association, Nursing and Midwifery Council and Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia. We constructed two major themes that reveal how nursing advocacy and activism are conceived and shaped in regulatory documents. Theme 1, Ideological arena describes the gendered and neoliberal subtexts influencing advocacy and activism. Theme 2, A five-pointed star, describes the shape of advocacy and activism in the regulatory documents.Conclusions: Regulatory documents from the USA, UK and Australia support diplomatic nursing advocacy and activism for people, equity, ourselves (nurses), the profession and systems change. However, more oppositional and disruptive advocacy and activism are potentially constrained by gendered and neoliberal subtexts that depoliticise nurses' roles.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
护理宣传和行动主义:对规范性文件的批判性分析。
背景:倡导和行动主义是一个动态的术语,代表了一系列旨在实现社会或政治变革的政治行动。关于护理倡导和行动主义在多大程度上属于合法的护理角色,已经争论了约 50 年。护理规范性文件,如行为准则和专业标准,可为护士在倡导和行动主义方面的行为提供指导。目的:探讨规范性文件对倡导和行动主义的明示或暗示,以及它们如何塑造倡导和行动主义:研究设计:我们采用反思性定性文件分析方法和批判女权主义视角,分析了来自美国、英国和澳大利亚的当代护理监管文件:本文没有人类参与者,无需知情同意:我们从美国护士协会、护理和助产委员会以及澳大利亚护理和助产委员会中确定了八份护理监管文件。我们构建了两大主题,揭示了护理倡导和行动主义是如何在监管文件中被构思和形成的。主题 1 "意识形态领域 "描述了影响倡导和行动主义的性别和新自由主义潜台词。主题 2 "五角星 "描述了规范性文件中倡导和行动主义的形态:美国、英国和澳大利亚的监管文件支持外交护理倡导和行动主义,以促进人、公平、我们自己(护士)、专业和系统变革。然而,更具反对性和破坏性的倡导和行动主义可能会受到性别和新自由主义潜台词的限制,这些潜台词将护士的角色非政治化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nursing Ethics
Nursing Ethics 医学-护理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
11.90%
发文量
117
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Nursing Ethics takes a practical approach to this complex subject and relates each topic to the working environment. The articles on ethical and legal issues are written in a comprehensible style and official documents are analysed in a user-friendly way. The international Editorial Board ensures the selection of a wide range of high quality articles of global significance.
期刊最新文献
Editorial & Perspectives on Assisted Dying. Sources of moral distress in nursing professionals: A scoping review. Truth-telling, and ethical considerations in terminal care: an Eastern perspective. Ethical considerations in the UK-Nepal nurse recruitment: Nepali nurses' perspectives. Nurses on the outside, problems on the inside! The duty of nurses to support unions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1