I don’t think I have to answer that to point out the flaw.
If all nursing theories considered are wrong than one of those can easily still be the one that produces the best results despite no correlation with what nursing actually is about.
A flaw I would expect to see more often is a nursing theory that has new age elements that are not linked to reality, makes the user feel helpful and good and leads possibly to a good care of patients. But that sounds like rating the more effective bedtime story or the more effective motivational mission statement.
The term “nursing theory” implies that it is a theory about how nursing should be done, not what thoughts the nurse should have while doing it.
There are actually some nursing theories–specifically those under the model of Transformation, which is apparently 1975-onwards–which are completely New Agey and waaay more useless than Roy’s theory. Roger’s theory of “Unitary Human Beings” defines humans as “indivisible energy fields defined by their patterns” and health as “a manifestation of constant and mutual exchange processes between the energy fields of the person and the environment.” Not only is that vague, it’s not even comprehensible to me.
I don’t think I have to answer that to point out the flaw. If all nursing theories considered are wrong than one of those can easily still be the one that produces the best results despite no correlation with what nursing actually is about. A flaw I would expect to see more often is a nursing theory that has new age elements that are not linked to reality, makes the user feel helpful and good and leads possibly to a good care of patients. But that sounds like rating the more effective bedtime story or the more effective motivational mission statement. The term “nursing theory” implies that it is a theory about how nursing should be done, not what thoughts the nurse should have while doing it.
There are actually some nursing theories–specifically those under the model of Transformation, which is apparently 1975-onwards–which are completely New Agey and waaay more useless than Roy’s theory. Roger’s theory of “Unitary Human Beings” defines humans as “indivisible energy fields defined by their patterns” and health as “a manifestation of constant and mutual exchange processes between the energy fields of the person and the environment.” Not only is that vague, it’s not even comprehensible to me.