Debra R. Hanna

Roy Adaptation Model and Perspectives on the Family

multiperson situations, family and community. In D. Orem, Nursing: Concepts of practice (5th ed., pp. 348-380). St. Louis, MO: C. V. Mosby. Taylor, S. G., Renpenning, K. E., Geden, E. A., Neuman, B. M., & Hart, M. (2001). A theory of dependent-care: A corollary theory to Orem’s theory of self-care. Nursing Science Quarterly, 14, 39. Wallace, W. (1996). The modeling of nature. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press. Wang, C., & Fenske, M. M. (1996). Self-care of adults with noninsulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: Influence of family and friends. Diabetes Educator, 22, 465-470.

Roy’s Adaptation Model:

This column presents a dialogue with three Roy scholars. They discuss research, practice, administration, and education issues in nursing from a Roy perspective and present data on curriculum in schools across the United States in relation to the use of nursing theory and Roy’s model.

Using the Roy Adaptation Model in Management of Work Groups

Human adaptation is the main concept of the Roy adaptation model (RAM) and it has been defined by Roy as both a state, such as the adaptation level, and as a process (Roy, 1990). The adaptation level is the pooled effect of internal and external environmental stimuli on the human adaptive system or the human social system. The concept of adaptation level was originally adopted from the work of Helson (1964), a physiological psychiatrist, who held a holistic view of human adaptation. The adaptation level is defined as integrated, where the client is adapting well so that no nursing intervention is required, or compensatory, where the client is only partially adapting so that some nursing intervention is needed to support adaptation, or compromised, where the client is unable to adapt so that intensive nursing intervention is required to assist adaptation (Roy & Andrews, 1999). The type and quality of human coping processes are important to how adaptation can be achieved. When it was first developed, the RAM provided an orderly process for assessing the adaptation level of individual persons, called the human adaptive system. Later, Roy developed the model to accommodate groups of people, the human social system (Roy & Andrews, 1999; Roy & Anway, 1989). Since adaptation is the prime model concept, coping is a key underlying human process. Roy has identified two types of coping processes for the individual person, the human adaptive system, called the regulator subsystem and the cognator subsystem. The regulator subsystem includes automatic bodily processes that seek to maintain system integrity. The cognator subsystem includes those cognitive or acquired coping processes used by individuals, for example, defense mechanisms, meditation, or discussion with others. Roy has identified two coping processes for the human social system, which are the stabilizer subsystem and the innovator subsystem. These two coping processes were originally identified for a version of the RAM called the Roy adaptation model for nursing administration, but they have since become incorporated into the model to be used when nursing the human social system (Roy & Andrews, 1999; Roy & Anway, 1989). The stabilizer subsystem, like the regulator subsystem, is “aimed at system maintenance” (Roy & Andrews, 1999, p. 47). This subsystem “involves the established structure, values, and daily activities whereby participants accomplish the primary purpose of the group and contribute to common purposes of society” (Roy & Andrews, 1999, p. 47). It helps to forestall turmoil when change is being introduced into a human social system, such as a family, community, or work group. The innovator subsystem offers “structures and processes for growth and change” (Roy & Andrews, 1999, p. 48). This subsystem has a dynamic contour and typically involves processes that lead to familial, community, or other social systems’ mutual growth, such as family counseling, strategic planning, teambuilding, or other types of group-based activity designed to facilitate a higher level of relational functioning.

Roy’s Specific Life Values and the Philosophical Assumption of Humanism

Roy’s philosophical assumption of humanism, which is shaped by the veritivity assumption, is considered in terms of her specific life values and in contrast to the contemporary view of humanism. Like veritivity, Roy’s philosophical assumption of humanism unites a theocentric focus with anthropological values. Roy’s perspective enriches the mainly secular, anthropocentric assumption. In this manuscript, the basis for Roy’s perspective of humanism will be discussed so that readers will be able to use the Roy adaptation model in an authentic manner.

Roy’s Specific Life Values and the Philosophical Assumption of Veritivity:

Roman Catholic beliefs that form the basis for Roy’s life values are discussed to help others understand veritivity and the Roy adaptation model more clearly. Veritivity, the main philosophical assumption of the Roy adaptation model, shapes it, and Roy’s assumption of humanism in a unique way. Veritivity has a theocentric focus, with anthropological values. Roy views human beings as individuals in community with a loving Creator and with others. Truth, freedom, and moral ends are discussed in terms of veritivity and in terms of contemporary values.