This paper presents the argument that much of the current focus on caring in nursing is misdirected in that it is aimed at explaining a complex process with conceptual similarities to teaching, in terms of behavioural categories and structures. It is asserted that a pervasive use of the word 'caring' as synonymous with nursing has contributed to an erroneous emphasis in general nursing on emotional caring. This reflects a dualist notion of physical and emotional care, operationalized as separate nursing activities. The growing association of nursing with caring is thought to reinforce a fallacious distinction between caring and curing which has particularly impeded the development of a truly psychotherapeutic role for psychiatric nurses. It is concluded that nursing skills will be neither elucidated by further analysis of the concept of care nor promulgated by the connotations of the word.

In order to investigate the psychodynamic concepts of "reparation' and "compulsive caring' as possible motivations for a career in nursing, a questionnaire was given to two groups of respondents, 115 nursing students and 97 people not involved in any of the helping professions. Both groups were asked whether or not they had experienced specific, potentially distressing events and circumstances in their childhood and teenage years. The null hypothesis was that there would be no statistically significant differences between the two groups on frequency of affirmative responses to these questions. Chi-square tests were used to determine the differential frequency of responses. The nursing students had a higher percentage of affirmative responses to 11 of the 14 questions, and statistically significant differences were identified. The nursing students had a significantly greater total number of recollected adverse experiences, and there was a significantly greater number of nursing students recollecting at least one. Significance on this result was maintained when males and females were analysed separately and together, with a higher level of significance reached for males than for females. Statistically significant differences between the two groups on their responses to specific questions were greatest for the questions about separations from mother or main carer and about the occurrence of major difficulties not covered in other questions. There is strong evidence for a rejection of the null hypothesis, the implications of which are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract