This paper argues that competence in nursing education is ethically incomplete without epistemic agency. Contemporary nursing programmes are increasingly shaped by competencies, assessment rubrics, curriculum mapping and audit-ready evidence. These mechanisms are legitimate and necessary for accountability, but they may become ethically insufficient when they make professional formation visible mainly as performance, compliance or documentation. Epistemic agency refers to the capacity to interpret experience, justify claims, question assumptions and participate as a legitimate knower in nursing practice. Although the term may be unfamiliar to some nurse educators, its absence is visible when students are trained to enact standards without being equally supported to reason about uncertainty, credibility, patient testimony and the knowledge claims embedded in care. Existing commitments to reflection, critical thinking, evidence-based practice, person-centred care and student voice provide important educational values, yet they often lack a sufficiently explicit account of the epistemic harms that occur when credibility, intelligibility and authority are unequally distributed. They do not fully explain how some knowers are believed while others are doubted, how some forms of knowledge become authoritative while others are treated as anecdotal and how nursing knowledge itself may be positioned as practical implementation rather than disciplinary contribution. Epistemic agency cannot be secured merely by asking students to think critically or nurses to listen more attentively. Such responses underestimate the social, institutional and curricular conditions through which knowledge is made credible, intelligible and actionable. Drawing on social epistemology, nursing ethics and nursing knowledge development, this discussion paper reframes epistemic agency as a condition of ethical professional formation beyond competence alone. No empirical data are reported. Practical reflexive prompts are offered for curriculum leaders, nurse educators, clinical supervisors and students.
María Antuña-Casal, Marta Rios· Nursing Ethics· 0 citations
ABSTRACT This discussion paper examines how care‐based nursing judgement becomes recognised, narrowed or excluded as professional knowledge within healthcare organisations. Nursing care is often described as relational, ethical, practical or compassionate, yet these descriptions may obscure its epistemic content: trained perception, contextual interpretation, anticipatory reasoning, moral judgement, continuity work and practical synthesis under uncertainty. Drawing on epistemic injustice, nursing knowledge development, care ethics and organisational governance, the paper argues that injustice in nursing knowledge is not only interpersonal but organisational. It identifies three mechanisms through which care‐based nursing knowledge may be downgraded: credibility distortion, interpretive narrowing and restricted epistemic uptake. The paper further develops the idea of reductive recognition: care may become visible in organisational systems only after being translated into categories that diminish its nursing rationality. Five organisational conditions are proposed for recognising care as knowledge: credible reception, hermeneutic infrastructure, shared knowledge governance, educational preparation and balanced standardisation. The central contribution is to shift the question from whether nurses possess knowledge to how healthcare organisations decide which forms of nursing knowledge are allowed to count.
María Antuña-Casal, Marta Rios· Nursing Inquiry· 0 citations
Pediatric nursing clinical reasoning is reframed as situated, developmentally informed, family-centered, and communicatively accountable judgment rather than as individual problem solving alone.
María Antuña-Casal, Marta Rios· Journal of pediatric nursing· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.