Compassion is often understood as central to nursing and as important to ensure quality nursing and healthcare. In recent years, there has been a focus on strategies in nursing education to ensure compassionate nurses. However, it is not always clear how the concept of compassion is understood. Theoretical conceptualisations that lie behind various understandings of compassion have consequences for how we approach compassion in nursing education. We present some ways in which compassion is often understood, their philosophical underpinnings and the (...) consequences these understandings can have for nursing education. We argue that it is useful for nursing education to understand compassion as a cognitive emotion and discuss how such an understanding can inform educational approaches to compassion. (shrink)

It is argued that a Christian spirituality of healthcare provision is founded on agape. In the medical context, agape is expressed primarily through empathy and compassion. The love that a healthcare professional gives is manifested in two major modalities–namely, receptivity and extension. Empathy is an extension through the imagination into a patient's inner world of experience. It requires being receptive to the pain and distress that the patient displays and speaks about. The theological connection between empathic attunement and the Incarnation (...) is developed. Compassion also involves feeling-with. This receptive stance is linked to rehem- or womb-compassion in the Hebrew Bible. Compassionate receptivity to the suffering of the patient drives a decision to extend oneself in order to alleviate it. (shrink)

In this article, I argue that the recent emphasis on compassion in healthcare practice lacks conceptual richness and clarity. In particular, I argue that it would be helpful to focus on a larger concept of empathy rather than compassion alone and that compassion should be thought of as a component of this larger concept of empathy. The first part of the article outlines a critique of the current discourse of compassion on three grounds. This discourse naturalizes, individualizes, and reifies compassion (...) leading to a decontextualized and simplified understanding of failures in healthcare practice. The second part uses resources from phenomenology and contemporary moral philosophy to construct a “hybrid” concept of empathy that includes both pre‐reflective/intuitive and cognitive/imaginative components. This “hybrid” concept of empathy leads to a more complex understanding of the multiple responses to others' distress. I conclude that there are no straightforward normative naturalistic responses to others' distress. Rather than conceptualizing compassion as a naturalistic impulse or a character‐based trait, we need to consider the complexity of our empathic recognition of vulnerable others. (shrink)