Argyris and Schön proposed that there are two forms of theory: ‘espoused’ theory, or that which we profess to use, and ‘theory in practice’. We see this concept illustrated in the discontinuity between mental health... [ view full abstract ]
Argyris and Schön proposed that there are two forms of theory: ‘espoused’ theory, or that which we profess to use, and ‘theory in practice’. We see this concept illustrated in the discontinuity between mental health practice as taught to trainee mental health nurses, and practice as demonstrated by qualified nurses.
I enrolled in a mental health nursing training program aware that I may have hurdles to overcome. Indeed, I left education and entered a system that is under-resourced and overstretched, draining hope from clients and professionals alike.
Concepts such as person-centred care and autonomy, central to my training, appear to be not ignored so much as almost absent from clinical practice. Openly stated awareness of such conceptual gulfs between theory and practice appears to be replaced by a cynical and resigned acceptance of an irretrievably inadequate sector of health and social care.
What can mental health workers, especially mental health nurses, do to navigate the issues presented by the move from education to practice undergone by all professionals?
In this presentation I will address the dilemma raised by this problematic duality, using examples from my own education and practice, such as the emphasis on promoting autonomy as compared to the apparent lack of autonomy for both clients and staff.
I will explore the ways in which I am holding onto my own identity as the nurse I want to be - practicing ethically, and promoting the autonomy of those I serve; and address the question of how, as practitioners, we remain human in a system that can dehumanise workers and clients alike.
Influencing professions , Supporting staff , Uncertainty
