Search

Previous research has established that the success of strikes, and social movements more broadly, depends on their ability to garner support from the public. However, there is scant published research investigating the response of the public to strike action by healthcare workers. In this study, we address this gap through a study of public responses to UK nursing strikes in 2022–2023, using a data set drawn from Twitter of more than 2300 publicly available tweets. We focus on negative tweets, investigating which societal discourses social media users draw on to oppose strike action by nurses. Using a combination of corpus‐based approaches and discourse analysis, we identified five categories of opposition: (i) discourse discrediting nurses; (ii) discourse discrediting strikes by nurses; (iii) discourse on the National Health System; (iv) discourse about the fairness of strikers' demands and (v) discourse about potential harmful impact. Our findings show how social media users operationalise wider societal discourses about the nursing profession (e.g., associations with care, gender, vocation and sacrifice) as well as recent crises such as the Covid‐19 pandemic to justify their opposition. The results also provide valuable insights into misconceptions about nursing, strike action and patient harm, which can inform strategies for public communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quality of care is a prominent discourse in modern health‐care and has previously been conceptualised in terms of ethics. In addition, the role of knowledge has been suggested as being particularly influential with regard to the nurse–patient–carer relationship. However, to date, no analyses have examined how knowledge (as an ethical concept) impinges on quality of care. Qualitative semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 26 patients with palliative and supportive care needs receiving district nursing care and thirteen of their lay carers. Poststructural discourse analysis techniques were utilised to take an ethical perspective on the current way in which quality of care is assessed and produced in health‐care. It is argued that if quality of care is to be achieved, patients and carers need to be able to redistribute and redevelop the knowledge of their services in a collaborative way that goes beyond the current ways of working. Theoretical works and extant research are then used to produce tentative suggestions about how this may be achieved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

GILLETT K. Nursing Inquiry 2012; 19: 297-307 A critical discourse analysis of British national newspaper representations of the academic level of nurse education: too clever for our own good? This critical discourse analysis examines articles about the academic level of nurse education that appeared in British national newspapers between 1999 and 2009. British newspaper journalists regularly attribute problems with recruitment into nursing and nursing care to the increasing academic nature of nurse education. It is impossible to separate discourse about nurse education from the wider nursing discourse. Many journalists laud a traditional and stereotypical construct of nurse identity and suggest that increasing nurse education produces nurses who are 'too clever to care'. This article argues that whilst nurses lack a voice in the National press, they have little input into the construction of newspaper discourse about nurse education and subsequently, limited influence on resulting public opinion, government policy and the morale of nurses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BURRELL B and TRIP H. Nursing Inquiry 2011; : 174-183 In this paper we provide a post structural analysis of the theoretical shifts informing changes to service delivery over the past 150 years in relation to people with intellectual disability. We utilise the New Zealand experience of reform as it reflected global knowledge at any given period. Firstly, we address the historical modes of treatment and care, with reference to the eugenics movement, the concepts informing 'Prisons of protection' and moral treatment. Secondly the paper traces reforms commencing in the 1960s where changes from institutional care to community care were informed by humanistic ideals, a key driver being the concept of normalisation. Theorists offered competing discourses that formed the bases of arguments for the status quo whilst resistant voices advocated change. Covering such significant changes leads us to assess the state of de-institutionalisation' as it stands today and how it may be perceived in the future. We assert that Foucault's genealogical approach provides analytic tools to uncover the dynamics of changing attitudes and approaches to service delivery. In applying a Foucauldian lens to the trajectory of reforms concerning institutionalisation to de-institutionalisation we question whether a form of re-institutionalisation may be occurring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Exploring nursing expertise: nurses talk nursing It has become increasingly important for practitioners to articulate their expertise in modern healthcare settings that demand high levels of accountability and evidence-based practice. The material presented within this article has been interpreted drawing from discourse analysis1 to help explore the discourses that shape and influence understandings of nursing practice. What we present are extracts from four of the 35 participant nurses who applied to take part in the Royal College of Nursing Institute's Expertise in Practice (pilot) Project (EPP). The material presented is used to provide a starting point for exploring how nurses talk about and construct expertise in nursing practice. The four nurse participants’ clinical practice areas cover palliative care, mental health, intensive care and fertility care. The material reveals high levels of intensity in the nurse–patient relationship, ‘maverick’ nursing practices and ongoing reflexivity. All of these aspects appear to capitalize on expertise as a ‘catalyst’ that alters treatment pathways and maximizes patient-centred outcomes. Exploring a discourse of nursing expertise exposes the tacit situated nature of professional practice that is heterogeneous and most difficult to articulate and explain. It is proposed that expertise tends to be understood from traditional and dominant discourses of medicine, management and technology. Explaining expertise in practice exposes non-conventional practice that in itself can be isolating and challenging to the status quo of contemporary health-care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]