Uses and Abuses of a Concept: A Discourse Analysis of "Dignity" Within The Context of Continence Care

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/160884
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Uses and Abuses of a Concept: A Discourse Analysis of "Dignity" Within The Context of Continence Care
Abstract:
Uses and Abuses of a Concept: A Discourse Analysis of "Dignity" Within The Context of Continence Care
Conference Sponsor:Midwest Nursing Research Society
Conference Year:2006
Author:Salsbury-Lyons, Stacie, MSN, RN
P.I. Institution Name:University of Iowa
Title:Clinical Nurse Researcher
Contact Address:College of Nursing, 1230 w 60th st, davenport, IA, 52806, USA
Contact Telephone:563-386-8130
Article One of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights". Persons living in nursing homes are accorded further "residents rights" protections under the law. One such right is "treatment with dignity". State surveyors and staff alike portray the treatment of incontinence as a "dignity issue" for residents. However, the notion of dignity within continence care remains misunderstood. This project was a two-year critical ethnography of continence care. This paper explores the concept of dignity as it is deployed discursively in conversations about resident issues, as well as in specific discussions about continence care. The settings were two nursing homes (for-profit corporate; not-for-profit religious) located in one midwestern community. Participants were interdisciplinary team members including nurses, nursing assistants, administrators, and others. Data were collected through observations, documents, and interviews. Discourse analysis provided the interpretive method. Administrator and direct care staff conversations revealed tensions in their depictions of resident dignity. Administrators were physically distant from incontinence, and thus primarily verbalized dignity within a conceptual triad of dignity, quality, and continence care. Management positioned the burden of resident dignity solely upon direct care workers, sometimes accusing nursing assistants of providing inhumane incontinence treatments. In contrast, direct care workers articulated their truth about human dignity both verbally and bodily. Nursing staff generally accepted their roles in continence care. However, staff resisted attempts to place the blame for resident rights violations in their laps. Staff shifted responsibility back to administrators who they felt withheld adequate human, technological, and spatial resources. Nursing staff further articulated that their own human worth might be diminished during continence care activities and avoided bodily movements that engendered these emotions. Problematically, such discursive exchanges might lead to the very resident rights violations professional caregivers desired to avoid.
Repository Posting Date:
26-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
17-Oct-2011
Sponsors:
Midwest Nursing Research Society

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleUses and Abuses of a Concept: A Discourse Analysis of "Dignity" Within The Context of Continence Careen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/160884-
dc.description.abstract<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">Uses and Abuses of a Concept: A Discourse Analysis of &quot;Dignity&quot; Within The Context of Continence Care</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Midwest Nursing Research Society</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2006</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Salsbury-Lyons, Stacie, MSN, RN</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">University of Iowa</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">Clinical Nurse Researcher</td></tr><tr class="item-address"><td class="label">Contact Address:</td><td class="value">College of Nursing, 1230 w 60th st, davenport, IA, 52806, USA</td></tr><tr class="item-phone"><td class="label">Contact Telephone:</td><td class="value">563-386-8130</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">stacie-lyons@uiowa.edu</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">Article One of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, &quot;All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights&quot;. Persons living in nursing homes are accorded further &quot;residents rights&quot; protections under the law. One such right is &quot;treatment with dignity&quot;. State surveyors and staff alike portray the treatment of incontinence as a &quot;dignity issue&quot; for residents. However, the notion of dignity within continence care remains misunderstood. This project was a two-year critical ethnography of continence care. This paper explores the concept of dignity as it is deployed discursively in conversations about resident issues, as well as in specific discussions about continence care. The settings were two nursing homes (for-profit corporate; not-for-profit religious) located in one midwestern community. Participants were interdisciplinary team members including nurses, nursing assistants, administrators, and others. Data were collected through observations, documents, and interviews. Discourse analysis provided the interpretive method. Administrator and direct care staff conversations revealed tensions in their depictions of resident dignity. Administrators were physically distant from incontinence, and thus primarily verbalized dignity within a conceptual triad of dignity, quality, and continence care. Management positioned the burden of resident dignity solely upon direct care workers, sometimes accusing nursing assistants of providing inhumane incontinence treatments. In contrast, direct care workers articulated their truth about human dignity both verbally and bodily. Nursing staff generally accepted their roles in continence care. However, staff resisted attempts to place the blame for resident rights violations in their laps. Staff shifted responsibility back to administrators who they felt withheld adequate human, technological, and spatial resources. Nursing staff further articulated that their own human worth might be diminished during continence care activities and avoided bodily movements that engendered these emotions. Problematically, such discursive exchanges might lead to the very resident rights violations professional caregivers desired to avoid.</td></tr></table>en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-26T23:12:19Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-17en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-26T23:12:19Z-
dc.description.sponsorshipMidwest Nursing Research Societyen_GB
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.