University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada V1V 1V7.
Nurs Inq. 2009 Dec;16(4):337-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1800.2009.00462.x.
The tremendous growth in nursing literature about spirituality has garnered proportionately little critique. Part of the reason may be that the broad generalizing claims typical of this literature have not been sufficiently explicated so that their particular implications for a practice discipline could be evaluated. Further, conceptualizations that attempt to encompass all possible views are difficult to challenge outside of a particular location. However, once one assumes a particular location in relation to spirituality, then the question becomes how one resolves the tension between what are essentially theological or philosophical commitments and professional commitments. In this study, we discuss the tension between these perspectives using the idea of a responsible nursing response to spiritual pluralism. We then problematize three claims about spirituality in nursing discourse based upon our location as scholars influenced by Christian theological understandings: (i) the claim that all individuals are spiritual; (ii) the claim that human spirituality can be assessed and evaluated; and (iii) the claim that spirituality is a proper domain of nursing's concern and intervention. We conclude by suggesting that the widely shared values of social justice, compassion and human dignity may well serve as a grounding for the critique of spiritual discourses in nursing across particularized positions.
护理学领域中关于灵性的文献数量迅速增长，但相关批判却相对较少。部分原因可能是，由于这类文献中的泛泛之谈并未得到充分阐述，因此无法评估其对实践学科的具体影响。此外，试图涵盖所有可能观点的概念化在特定地点之外是很难受到质疑的。然而，一旦人们对灵性持特定立场，那么问题就变成了如何解决神学或哲学信仰与职业信仰之间的紧张关系。在本研究中，我们使用负责任的护理对精神多元化的回应这一概念来讨论这些观点之间的紧张关系。然后，我们基于我们作为受基督教神学理解影响的学者的立场，对护理话语中关于灵性的三个主张提出质疑：(i) 所有人都是有灵性的主张；(ii) 人类灵性可以被评估和评价的主张；以及 (iii) 灵性是护理关注和干预的适当领域的主张。最后，我们认为，社会正义、同情和人类尊严等广泛共享的价值观很可能成为批判护理中灵性话语的基础，无论这些观点是否具有特殊性。
