The role of the palliative care nurse emphasizes the need for holistic care, and as this role has developed it has become evident that palliative care nurses require skills which, arguably, not all registered general nurses possess; particularly, skills pertaining to the psychological, social and spiritual domains of the person. In order to identify the skills that such nurses may require, there may be merit in considering other specialities of nursing which pay particular attention to the psychological, social and spiritual domains of the person. Consequently, this two-part paper explores the areas of commonality and synchronicity between palliative care nurses and mental health nurses. The authors argue that this commonality is best articulated under the headings: defining the needs of the client group, the role of the nurse in non-physical care, the nurse--client relationship, and the locus of control. They also argue that the differences between these groups of nurses are best articulated under the headings: facilitation/confrontation, and the focus on physical care. Part one of this paper therefore focuses on the first three areas of alleged commonality, with part two focusing on the fourth commonality, the key differences and the implications of such similarity. Given these areas of similarity the authors argue there is a case for reconsidering if the RGN qualification is an essential requirement for working within palliative care or if those with other skills -- skills based on 'being with' rather than 'doing for' -- such as RMNs, should be thought of for such roles.

This is the second of a two-part paper which explores the areas of commonality and synchronicity between palliative care (PC) nurses and mental health nurses. The authors argue that this commonality is best articulated under the headings: defining the needs of the client group, the role of the nurse in non-physical care, the nurse--client relationship, and the locus of control. They also argue that the differences between these groups of nurses are best articulated under the headings: facilitation/confrontation and the focus on physical care. Part one focused on the first three areas of commonality, whereas this paper focuses on the fourth commonality, the locus of control. It also focuses on key differences and the implications of such similarity. The paper highlights the practice, education and research implications of this alleged commonality. It suggests, given the evidence that clients perceive the therapeutic relationship as the vital and unique aspect of PC nursing, that those working within palliative care need to question whether or not RGN registration is an essential requirement, or whether those with other skills, such as psychiatric/mental health (P/MH) nurses, should be considered for such roles. It highlights the need for the provision of post-basic counselling courses and the potential value for PC nurses of receiving clinical supervision from P/MH nurses or mental health liaison nurses. Lastly, it posits that the research issues arising out of this alleged commonality centre on the potential impact such transitions in care delivery may have on the care delivered, on the nurses themselves and on the clients.

This article arose out of discussions, in a higher education setting, concerning the roles of palliative care nurses and mental health nurses; mental health nursing students frequently argue that they engage in the key principles of palliative care. This led the authors to consider the students’ arguments more fully and explore the relevant theoretical and empirical literature in palliative care and mental health nursing in order to substantiate or refute the claims put forward. This article examines the needs of palliative care patients and mental health patients and considers the core areas of similarity and difference between the roles of registered general nurses and mental health nurses. As a result, the authors urge palliative care managers to consider the arguments put forward with a view to redressing the current imbalance concerning the employment of registered mental health nurses in palliative care settings.

The role of the palliative care nurse emphasizes the need for holistic care, and as this role has developed it has become evident that palliative care nurses require skills which, arguably, not all registered general nurses possess; particularly, skills pertaining to the psychological, social and spiritual domains of the person. In order to identify the skills that such nurses may require, there may be merit in considering other specialities of nursing which pay particular attention to the psychological, social and spiritual domains of the person. Consequently, this two‐part paper explores the areas of commonality and synchronicity between palliative care nurses and mental health nurses. The authors argue that this commonality is best articulated under the headings: defining the needs of the client group, the role of the nurse in non‐physical care, the nurse–client relationship, and the locus of control. They also argue that the differences between these groups of nurses are best articulated under the headings: facilitation/confrontation, and the focus on physical care. Part one of this paper therefore focuses on the first three areas of alleged commonality, with part two focusing on the fourth commonality, the key differences and the implications of such similarity. Given these areas of similarity the authors argue there is a case for reconsidering if the RGN qualification is an essential requirement for working within palliative care or if those with other skills – skills based on ‘being with’ rather than ‘doing for’– such as RMNs, should be thought of for such roles.

This is the second of a two‐part paper which explores the areas of commonality and synchronicity between palliative care (PC) nurses and mental health nurses. The authors argue that this commonality is best articulated under the headings: defining the needs of the client group, the role of the nurse in non‐physical care, the nurse–client relationship, and the locus of control. They also argue that the differences between these groups of nurses are best articulated under the headings: facilitation/confrontation and the focus on physical care. Part one focused on the first three areas of commonality, whereas this paper focuses on the fourth commonality, the locus of control. It also focuses on key differences and the implications of such similarity. The paper highlights the practice, education and research implications of this alleged commonality. It suggests, given the evidence that clients perceive the therapeutic relationship as the vital and unique aspect of PC nursing, that those working within palliative care need to question whether or not RGN registration is an essential requirement, or whether those with other skills, such as psychiatric/mental health (P/MH) nurses, should be considered for such roles. It highlights the need for the provision of post‐basic counselling courses and the potential value for PC nurses of receiving clinical supervision from P/MH nurses or mental health liaison nurses. Lastly, it posits that the research issues arising out of this alleged commonality centre on the potential impact such transitions in care delivery may have on the care delivered, on the nurses themselves and on the clients.