There are many ways of how to use power in the field of nursing. Barrett offers to determine it as a possibility to participate in organizational change knowingly. According to her theory of power as knowing participation, awareness, choices, freedom to act intentionally, and the involvement in creating change are the main dimensions of power (Barrett, 2015). The author does not identify the exact order of these concepts because their priorities may vary in different settings. Barrett (2017) also explains the disadvantages of nursing theories and frameworks. Therefore, each theory must involve a chance to improve the quality of life (Chinn & Falk‐Rafael, 2015). The chosen theory proves that nurses should be aware of what they choose and feel free to take a new step with a number of grounds for change being gathered (Chang et al., 2016; Macoskey & Dunn 2017). Barrett (2015) names these worldviews as power-as-control (where hierarchies and determinations play a role) and power-as-freedom (where causality has a meaning). Without awareness, no positive results of change can be achieved. People have to create new realities and use power as a tool to reach their goals.
I think that Barrett’s theory has to be studied in nursing schools and colleges as it can be used not only as a chance to understand individual power but also as an opportunity to learn about power in groups where nurses have to work. Every group may have its size, purpose, and composition. As it is hard to organize different people following one standard, it is possible to use this theory of power as knowing participation and make sure that all participants are ready to work and use their knowledge. Though this theory has a complex structure and a number of concepts being used simultaneously, as soon as a nurse learns the basics, it can be easily applied to the chosen setting. Knowledge can be gained and developed in multiple ways. Therefore, participation with awareness is the key to success for many nurses.
For example, a group of nurses is informed about coming changes in handout processes and the necessity of weekly reports and their obligatory participation in these activities. Instead of using Lewin’s theory of change or Maslow’s motivation theory, these nurses are welcome to rely on the basics of Barrett’s theory and get prepared for any change with a possibility to improve their awareness and participate willingly and knowingly. They have to read recent journal articles and control their results. At the same time, they should follow their free will and set deadlines regarding their own needs and possibilities. This theory helps to control and never forget about freedom. In addition, nurses should want to share their opinions and experiences in organizing handouts and writing reports. Such involvement of the theory can focus on the information that helps nurses achieve positive outcomes and understand what kind of information should be exchanged. As a result, nurses combine the characteristics of the two theories and develop new skills and abilities.
To conclude, I would like to state that the theory of power as knowing participation introduced by Barrett has a number of benefits. They include the possibility to prepare nurses for various changes and improve their level of knowledge regarding the situations and settings offered. At the same time, such shortages as a complex framework of the theory and a number of concepts being used simultaneously may prevent some participants from using this theory as the basis for change. Awareness and change are the key figures in healthcare organizations, and this theory is a chance to learn their worth and the ways of their possible combination and application.
References
Barrett, E. A. M. (2015). Barrett’s theory of power as knowing participation. In M. C. Smith & M. E. Parker (Eds.), Nursing theories and nursing practice (4th ed.) (pp. 495-508). Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis Company.
Barrett, E. A. M. (2017). Again, what is nursing science? Nursing Science Quarterly, 30(2), 129-133.
Chang, S. J., Kwak, E. Y., Hahm, B. J., Seo, S. H., Lee, D. W., & Jang, S. J. (2016). Effects of a meditation program on nurses’ power and quality of life. Nursing Science Quarterly, 29(3), 227-234.
Chinn, P. L., & Falk‐Rafael, A. (2015). Peace and power: A theory of emancipatory group process. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 47(1), 62-69.
Macoskey, C., & Dunn, D. J. (2017). Essential oils and gastroparesis. Holistic Nursing Practice, 31(6), 393-399.
Science, Nursing, And Knowledge Base Expansion
The concept of normal science seems to be crucial in the realm of nursing since it promotes the further improvement of patient outcomes and the enhancement of knowledge and skills acquisition among nurses. The emphasis on the exploration of the existing opportunities and the use of research as the tool for identifying new opportunities must be credited as an important viewpoint on the significance of research in nursing. Therefore, the idea of normal science as the foundation for developing new frameworks for managing patients’ needs should be deemed as legitimate.
That being said, the application of normal science should not be viewed as the sole principle that nurses must follow. In addition, the philosophy of the evidence-based practice (EBP) must be incorporated into the framework. As a result, a comprehensive analysis of the existing opportunities can be facilitated. Furthermore, the EBP tool creates premises for adopting a patient-centered approach based on cross-cultural communication.
While Kuhn’s approach was developed after the framework suggested by Nightingale, the latter cannot be viewed as its direct predecessor. Although Kuhn admittedly borrows certain elements from Nightingale’s approach, he manages to add the new elements that make the framework unique and, therefore, easily distinguishable among the rest of the nursing theories. Nightingale focused extensively on natural laws and the way in which they affect the well-being of patients, as well as the provision of the appropriate services.
Kuhn’s theory, in turn, incorporates similar ideas, yet it dismisses the idea of science being value-free. As a result, the identified framework allows placing a much greater emphasis on the use of research as a tool for improving the quality of nursing services (Smith & Parker, 2015).
References
Alligood, M. R. (2013). Chapter 2 nursing models: Normal science for nursing practice. Nursing theory, utilization and application (2nd ed.) (pp. 13-62). New York, NY: Elsevier Health Sciences.
Smith, M. C., & Parker, M. E. (2015). Nursing theories and nursing practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis.
Utilitarianism: Poverty Reduction Through Charity
Introduction
Global moral issues may be hard to discuss because of their complex nature. These problems do not affect a single individual or a small group – they span across borders and nations. World hunger and poverty are one of these problems, as one can encounter them in many parts of the world. While discussing these issues, many people use various philosophical and ethical principles to back up their claims. The debate about reducing global poverty by taxing wealthy people is often based on the ideas of Utilitarianism. This paper aims to prove that levels of poverty can be reduced if wealthy individuals donate a part of their earnings, using the main principles of the utilitarian theory and Bentham’s Felicific Calculus.
Utilitarianism
The utilitarian philosophy is based on a belief that the outcomes of the situation have greater significance than the means of achieving it. Therefore, while discussing morally controversial topics, people should concentrate on the result and choose actions that will be the most beneficial in reaching it. The actions themselves should not be held up to judgment, as their nature is not essential to utilitarianism followers. According to Piacquadio, utilitarianism can be justified as a viable method of resolving conflicts because it equated all people and a lack of bias for any particular group (1264).
World poverty remains one of the central contemporary issues of this world. Through the view of utilitarianism principles, poverty of nations can be solved by redistributing the funds of wealthy individuals to various organizations that provide food and shelter for people living in poverty. The funds that are not being actively used by persons with substantial incomes seem to be the best sources of money for this situation. First of all, these resources are not utilized in the market. Thus, the use of these funds will bring world poverty down. According to the concepts of utilitarianism, the outcome can and should be reached by any means necessary (Barrow 51). The result of this issue is represented by people, who are currently living in conditions unfit for healthy and profitable existence, receiving financial help. As a result, these people will be able to afford healthy food, better living conditions, and better jobs. Therefore, the lives of many individuals will become better.
Felicific Calculus
The felicific calculus accounts for several factors. First of all, the intensity of an outcome should be considered. The redistribution of wealth from a few individuals will help millions of people that suffer from poverty. Secondly, the duration of this effect is long, as wealthy people continuously earn large amounts of money. The principle of certainty is followed as well because many people will benefit from these funds. Propinquity explores the remoteness of the outcome. If individuals with excessive income donate money to the most efficient charities battling poverty, the result can be observed in a matter of weeks. The purity and fecundity of this decision are also evident. The presence of funds for people in poverty will not cause them to feel negative emotions. Finally, according to D’Souza and Adams, the value of spending money significantly overweighs donating people’s discomfort (9). Therefore, according to the central principles of felicific calculus, giving individuals will suffer few adverse consequences and people in poverty will get good results.
Conclusion
All in all, explaining the problem of world poverty through the concepts of utilitarianism rationalizes the idea of money redistribution. The means of a small number of individuals giving money to help thousands of people justify the outcome of lower levels of poverty.
Works Cited
Barrow, Robin. Utilitarianism: A Contemporary Statement. Routledge, 2015.
D’Souza, Jeevan F., and C. Kelly Adams. “On Measuring the Moral Value of Action.” Frontiers of Philosophy in China, vol. 11, no. 1, 2016, pp. 122-136.
Piacquadio, Paolo Giovanni. “A Fairness Justification of Utilitarianism.” Econometrica, vol. 85, no. 4, 2017, pp. 1261-1276.