Name of the student: Name of the university: METAPARADIGM 1 METAPARADIGM 1 METAPARADIGM Name of the student:

Running head: METAPARADIGM
METAPARADIGM
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1
METAPARADIGM
Contents
Introduction:....................................................................................................................................2
First component – person (my definition):......................................................................................2
First component – person (Betty Neuman’s definition):.................................................................3
Experience:......................................................................................................................................4
Second component – environment (my definition):........................................................................4
Second component – environment (Betty Neuman’s definition):...................................................5
Experience:......................................................................................................................................6
Third component – health (my definition):.....................................................................................6
Third component – health (Betty Neuman’s definition):................................................................7
Experience:......................................................................................................................................7
Fourth component – nursing (my definition):.................................................................................8
Fourth component – nursing (Betty Neuman’s definition):............................................................9
Experience:......................................................................................................................................9
Conclusion:....................................................................................................................................10
References:....................................................................................................................................11

2
METAPARADIGM
Introduction:
A meta-paradigm can be defined as the set of theories or the ideas that help in providing
the structure about how a disciple should be functioning effectively. In case of a nursing disciple,
the theories of meta-paradigm is seen to be comprised of four important but basic concepts that
can help to address patients as whole as well as the health and well being of the patients, the
environment of the patient as well the nursing responsibilities of the professionals (Mc Arthur &
love, 2017). Therefore, these four basic nursing paradigms can be seen to point towards the
holistic view or care where the well-being and medical health of the patients are connected to the
four interactive components (Alligood, 2017). This assignment will mainly be a reflective one
which will compare about the definitions that I had put forward in the first assignment and that
of Betty Newman’s model. It will also describe about the various incidents that I had gone
through in the placements that had enhanced my skills and knowledge.
First component – person (my definition):
One of the first components of the meta-paradigm concept is the “human being” or
“person”. The concept of human beings is often defined as open fields of energy that possess
unique and various types of life experiences. It can be said that as energy fields, they are
considered larger than as well as different from the total sum of their various parts and cannot be
connected be predicted from the knowledge of their part (Bender, 2018). My definition therefore
states that persons are holistic beings that are dynamic, unique, multidimensional, sentient and
even capable of aesthetic appreciation, abstract reasoning, creativity as well as self-
responsibility. I also believe that language, caring, empathy and other abstract patterns of
communication are all important aspects of an individually higher level of complexity and
diversity. These factors thereby enable one person to increase their knowledge about their own

3
METAPARADIGM
self as well as that of the environment (Decker & Hamilton, 2018). Therefore, I believe that
humans need to be viewed as valued persons who need to be respected, nurtured as well as
understood and should be given the right to make their own informed choices regarding their
health.
First component – person (Betty Neuman’s definition):
The definition as provided by Betty Neuman, while describing the concept pf person, is
not entirely dependent and reflects another prospect of the concept. The definition provided by
me has judged the concept of person from a microanalysis level describing the different
characteristic feature that explains the cause of persons being called the holistic individuals
(Founds, 2018). Betty Newman had represented similar concept but she had described human
beings as the multi-dimensional being consisting of five important subsystems of variable.
Although, Betty had used the term called multidimensional for explaining human beings, I have
not used the term “multi-dimensional’. However, the concept that I have used is similar to that of
the Neuman’s model where persons are complicated systems of various interplaying factors that
make them a holistic being. Betty had described the five person variables or the subsystem as the
physiological system, psychological, socio-cultural, developmental and even spiritual
components (Vaughn et al., 2016). She had discussed that each of the layers remain present in
persons as concentric circles. This mainly comprises of the central core, lines of resistance as
well as lines of normal defense and lines of flexible defense. I did not discuss these important
components in my definition that shows my definition could not capture the real essence of
“persons”. Betty had also described human beings as the open systems that are on the constant
changes and move towards a dynamic state or system stability or towards illness of varying
degrees (Rosenberg et al., 2017).