Humanistic Nursing - Loretta T. Zderad (best books to read for knowledge TXT) 📗

p. 71.

[3] R. D. Laing, The Politics of Experience (New York: Ballantine Books, 1967), p. 23.

[4] Buber, The Knowledge of Man, p. 60.

{21}

3

HUMANISTIC NURSING: A LIVED DIALOGUE

The meaning of humanistic nursing is found in the human act itself, that is, in the phenomenon of nursing as it is experienced in the everyday world. Therefore, the interrelated practical and theoretical development of humanistic nursing is dependent on nurses experiencing, conceptualizing, and sharing their unique angular views of their unique lived nursing worlds. An open framework suggesting dimensions for such exploration was derived from a consideration of the phenomenon of nursing within its basic context, namely, the human situation. The elements of this humanistic nursing framework include incarnate men (patient and nurse) meeting (being and becoming) in a goal-directed (nurturing well-being and more-being), intersubjective transaction (being with and doing with) occurring in time and space (as measured and as lived by patient and nurse) in a world of men and things.

The framework offers a little security by providing some reference points for the exploration. However, what is gained in clarity by conceptual abstraction is lost from the flavor of the actual experience. Like a weather map that statically represents major factors and currents in their interrelatedness, the framework discloses a nexus of elements. But it is as far from the real phenomenon of nursing with its pains and suffering and comforting and joys and hopes as the weather map is from real weather with its wind and rain and heat and cold. This chapter is concerned with the same basic framework of humanistic nursing but seen in an enlivened form. To inspirit its constructs the search must return again to the existential source, to the nursing situation as it is lived.

When I reflect on an act of mine (no matter how simple or complex) that I can unhesitatingly label "nursing," I become aware of it as goal-directed (nurturing) being with and doing with another. The intersubjective or interhuman element, "the between," runs through nursing interactions like an underground stream conveying the nutrients of healing and growth. In everyday practice, we are usually so involved with the immediate demands of our "being with and {22} doing with" the patient that we do not focus on the overshadowed plane of "the between." However, occasionally, in beautiful moments, the interhuman currents are so strong that they flood our conscious awareness. Such rare and rewarding moments of mutual presence remind us of the elusive ever-present "between."

>From these epiphanic episodes in our personal nursing experience, we have certain and immediate knowledge of intersubjectivity. Through our experience, too, we know that both humanizing and dehumanizing effects can result from human interactions. Therefore, it is essential for the development of humanistic nursing to explore and describe its intersubjective character.

Although many nurses have agreed in principle about the importance of this work, they also have expressed the feelings of frustration and discouragement attending it. There are real difficulties involved in attempting to describe something so real yet so nebulous as "the between." The descriptions must be derived from our own real nursing experiences. This means that we must develop habits of conscious awareness of experience, of recall, and of reflection. Then we must struggle with our language finding the words in our physically and technologically oriented vocabularies, perhaps even creating terms, to convey the substance and flavor of the experience of intersubjectivity.

Furthermore, description of the intersubjective quality of nursing is difficult because of its peculiar pervasiveness. Whether it is consciously recognized or not, it is part of every nursing transaction. However, to consider and explore intersubjectivity solely as a component or constituent of nursing, even a necessarily inherent or an essential one, would be to see it out of true perspective. The "between" is more than a factor or facet of nursing; it is the basic relation in which and through which nursing can occur. So the question remains. How can our experiences, our angular views, our glimpses of this foundation, this necessary means of nursing, be conceptualized and shared?

Once while reflecting on the nature of nursing against a background of notions about intersubjectivity drawn from experience and literature and testing them against my own real life experiences of nursing, I suddenly saw that nursing itself is a particular form of human dialogue. This insight occurred to me with clarity, conviction, and all the force of a brand new idea. It was so obvious, so distinct, so simple, so clearly a central intuition that could illuminate the phenomenon of nursing from within. I experienced the idea as fresh and excitingly full of promise.

Yet, when I said it out loud, "Nursing is dialogue," the words seemed too meager to convey the true meaning of the idea and its real significance. There was, furthermore, an annoying shadow of familiarity lurking about it. It was almost as if I had expressed something similar previously. At first, I hesitated to share this insight with others for fear they would extinguish it by saying, "of course, everyone knows that," or "I've heard you say something like that before." Still, I experienced it as an idea I had to express. Moved by the pressure of feelings of responsibility and desire to share, in 1973 I wrote a paper, "The Dialogue Called Nursing." {23}

In retrospect, that paper has the marks of a hesitant beginning, restrained by cautious statements and supposedly protective references to existential literature. Dissatisfaction with it prompted further rethinking and revision. Searching through my files during this process, I found, to my great surprise, some notes on the dialogic nature of nursing written by myself three and six years previously. In fact, a three-year-old note contained the very title, "Dialogue Called Nursing"! Now, how is it possible to grasp a truth and then "forget" that one knows it and later meet and grasp the old truth again as new? The difference in these experiences of knowing, for me at least in this case, is that now I know as if from the inside out that nursing is dialogical. The idea seems to have sprouted out of the lived phenomenon, to have broken forth from the ground of experience, as opposed to having been concluded in my earlier "intellectual," "theoretical," or "philosophical" ponderings. But how did the earlier idea, the conclusion that nursing is dialogical, become a live option for me? Why did it appeal to me? How did it come to make sense in the first place if not because of my experience?

The concept and the actual experience revitalize each other. Perhaps this is the value of an existentially grounded insight; it has a kind of durability resulting from its continuous rejuvenation by the interplay of experiencing and conceptualizing. Some old ideas are always new. In this spirit, this chapter looks again at humanistic nursing as lived dialogue.

LIVED DIALOGUE

The central insight (intuition or idea) from which this exploration grows is this: nursing itself is a form of human dialogue. I mean that the phenomenon of nursing, that is, the nurturing, intersubjective transaction, the event lived or experienced by the participants in the everyday world, is a dialogue.

Much has been written about dialogue and, as the word is now in vogue, it is being used in different ways. Here, the term "dialogue" is used to denote a broader concept than the typical dictionary definition of dialogue as "a conversation between two or more persons or between characters in a drama or novel." It is used in the existential sense. It implies an "ontological sphere," in Buber's terms, or the "realm of being" to which Marcel refers. Here it refers to a lived dialogue, that is, to a particular form of intersubjective relating. This may be understood in terms of seeing the other person as a distinct unique individual and entering into relation with him. In other words, nursing is a dialogical mode of being in an intersubjective situation.

As in common usage, here also, the term "dialogue" implies communication, but in a much more general sense. It is not restricted to the notion of sending and receiving messages verbally and nonverbally. Rather, dialogue is viewed as communication in terms of call and response. {24}

Nursing implies a special kind of meeting of human persons. It occurs in response to a perceived need related to the health-illness quality of the human condition. Within that domain, which is shared by other health professions, nursing is directed toward the goal of nurturing well-being and more-being (human potential). Nursing, therefore, does not involve a merely fortuitous encounter but rather one in which there is purposeful call and response. In this vein, humanistic nursing may be considered as a special kind of lived dialogue.

NURSING VIEWED AS DIALOGUE

These considerations of the dialogical character of nursing will be more fruitful if they are related to some concrete nursing experience. Reflect for a moment on your daily nursing practice. Recall an encounter, a specific interaction with a patient (client). Try to remember the details. Where were you? What time of day was it? Who was present? What was your state of being—what were you feeling, thinking, doing? How did the interaction begin? What happened between you? What was felt, said, done? What was left unsaid, undone? How did the interaction end or close? How long did the flavor last? Now keep this concrete instance of your lived nursing reality in mind and let it raise its questions in the following exploration.

Meeting

The act of nursing involves a meeting of human persons. As was noted above, it is a special or particular kind of meeting because it is purposeful. Both patient and nurse have a goal or expectation in mind. The inter subjective transaction, therefore, has meaning for them; the event is experienced in light of their goal(s). Or in other words, the living human act of nursing is formed by its purpose. Its goal-directedness colors the attributes and process of the nursing dialogue.

When a nurse and patient come together in a nursing situation, their meeting may be expected or planned by one or both or it may be unexpected by one or both. In any case, the goal or purpose of nursing holds. Even in a spontaneous interaction where they have met only by chance, in a health care facility or any place where one is identified as patient and the other as nurse, there is an implicit expectation that the nurse will extend herself in a helpful way if the patient needs assistance. If the meeting is planned or expected, this factor influences the dialogue. Each comes with feelings aroused by anticipation of the event, for example anxiety, fear, dread, hope, pleasure, waiting, impatience, dependence, hostility, responsibility.

Another factor experienced in their meeting is the amount of choice or control either nurse or patient had over their coming together. In today's complex health care systems, a nurse may be assigned to care for a particular patient, or for persons in an area or unit, or may be called into service through a registry, {25} or may be approached directly by a patient. From the other side, the patient also experiences varying degrees of control over his meetings with nurses depending on the system in which the health care is offered, his location, his financial means, and so forth. So when a patient and nurse do meet in a given instance, each comes to the situation bearing remnants of feeling of having caused or not having caused this encounter with this particular individual. (Of course, even in the most de-individualized systems the nurse and/or patient can still control their meetings to some extent, for example, avoidance by the nurse being too busy or avoidance by the patient feigning sleep.)

The patient and the nurse are two unique individuals meeting for a purpose. In the existential sense, each of these persons is his choice, each is his history. Each comes to meet the other with all that he is and all that he is not at this moment in this place. Each comes as a particular incarnate being. Each is a specific being in a specific body through which he affects the other and the world and through which he is affected by them. This nurse who uses her eyes, ears, nose, hands, her body, this way here and now meets this patient whose body in this condition serves him this way here and now.

Furthermore, both the patient and the nurse have the human capacity for disclosing or enclosing themselves. So they have some control over the quality of their meeting by choosing how and how much to be open with and to be open to the other. Their openness is influenced by their views of the purpose of the meeting. In general, the patient expects to receive help and the nurse expects to give it. However, their views may differ on the precise need and the kind