The Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) Today and AACN (Essay Sample)

Doctor of Nursing Practice Today
[Name]
[Institution]
Doctor of Nursing Practice Today
The Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) degree continues to be embroiled in controversy since its endorsement in 2004 by the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN). Most of the controversies are as a result of a clash of politics and power. The AACN proposed that the DNP should become the advanced practice nurses’ single entry education level starting from 2015. This analysis explores some of the controversies regarding the DNP and the role played by politics and power in those contentions.
The benefits cited by the AACN in its proposal for the adoption of DNP include enhancing the nurses’ competencies so that they can handle the clinical, leadership and faculty responsibilities, which are increasing in complexity and advance their knowledge for better patient outcomes and nursing practice (AACN, 2004). Other reasons include improving their leadership skills, enhancing the match of the requirements of the program with the earned credential, and ensuring that they are at par with individuals in other health professions. Furthermore, DNP will enhance the nursing image, ensure a higher supply of clinical instruction faculty, and attract people from both non-nursing and nursing backgrounds (AACN, 2004). However, the underlying principle for the introduction of DNP is flawed for several reasons.
To begin with, the assumption that Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APNs) require further education for improved care quality is flawed. Research has proved that APNs are competent enough and they do not need additional education (Cronenwett et al., 2011). The master’ preparation of the APNs has been found to be adequate for the provision of safe care (Cronenwett et al., 2011). Further, there is no proof that a DNP will result in enhanced patient safety (Fulton & Lyon, 2005). Moreover, pursuing a DNP may not bring them at par with the physicians because of power discrepancies and political influence that exist in the healthcare system. For instance, even though it has been proven that APNs are competent, practice laws that restrict them from independent practice have not been changed (Roberts & Glod, 2005). Organized medicine has utilized its political power to prevent such changes from taking place. Thus, even if the nurse practitioners pursue practice doctorates, they may not get the respect and autonomy that they desire. This change can only take place if the nursing community engages in a shared political action to change the power dynamics in the healthcare system (Roberts & Glod, 2005).
Another justification cited by the AACN is to ensure a sufficient supply of instruction faculty. However, those who pursue the DNP to get faculty positions and advance in their careers may not achieve their goals because this degree is not research-based. Research expertise is a requirement for promotion in many faculty positions and nurses who pursue the DNP may not also qualify for tenure. Even if they get the faculty positions, they will not feel at par with their colleagues with PhDs because they will not have similar rights (Fulton & Lyon, 2005). Another problem is that nurses with PhDs believe that the DNP will affect the pace at which knowledge develops in their discipline and the two programs might be considered to belong to the same level (Edwardson, 2010). It takes more effort and time to complete the PhD than the DNP, and this has raised controversy over whether the two have the same status. The DNP is different from PhD because the former is research-oriented while the latter is practice-oriented. While the PhD prepares students for teaching and research positions, the DNP trains them to take up clinical practice and administration. Thus, the two degrees complement each other (Edwardson, 2010).
Solutions need to be found to end the confusion and controversies that surround this degree. For instance, nurses with a DNP should qualify for tenure and promotion in faculties because the research requirement is not necessary for teaching nursing professionals. It is not necessary for students to be taught by researchers (Roberts & Glod, 2005). Therefore, there is no reason to prevent the faculty members with a DNP from qualifying for tenure and promotion. In fact, it is not fair to require nurses to have a PhD in order to qualify for tenure and promotion in faculties while those with Doctor of Medicine are allowed to teach in medical schools. Professionals in all healthcare fields should be treated equally. An increasing number of people are earning the DNP and its credibility is growing. In order to eliminate the controversies, a possible future course of action would be to introduce two nursing education tenure track...