NURS 4210 PH4005 Evidence-Based Intervention Plan Practicum Presentation Example
NURS 4210 PH4005 Evidence-Based Intervention Plan Practicum Presentation Assignment
NURS 4210 PH4005 Evidence-Based Intervention Plan Practicum Presentation Assignment Brief
Course: Role of the Nurse Leader in Population Health
Assignment ...
PHI 413V RS Applying the Four Principles Case Study Example
Assignment Brief: PHI 413V RS Applying the Four Principles Case Study Assignment
Assignment Instructions Overview:
This assignment aims to apply the four ethical principles in the context of a case study titled “Healing and Autonomy.” The case study involves a patient named James and his parents, Mike and Joane, facing critical decisions regarding James’ medical treatment. The ethical principles to be considered are Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy, and Justice.
Understanding Assignment Objectives:
The primary goal of this assignment is for students to analyze and apply the four ethical principles within the given case study. The students are expected to:
- Identify Actions Based on Ethical Principles: Recognize and outline specific actions taken by healthcare professionals and the involved individuals in the case study that align with the ethical principles of Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy, and Justice.
- Evaluate Application of Principlism: Evaluate how the principles of Principlism, as outlined in the case study, contribute to ethical decision-making in the healthcare setting.
- Christian Worldview Consideration: Analyze the case study from the perspective of the Christian worldview, emphasizing which ethical principle holds precedence and how a Christian might prioritize the four principles.
- Ranking Ethical Principles: Discuss how a Christian might rank the priority of the four principles within the Christian worldview, justifying the order based on their significance in healthcare decision-making.
The Student’s Role:
As a student undertaking this assignment, your role is to thoroughly examine the provided case study, “Healing and Autonomy.” Pay specific attention to actions taken by healthcare professionals, patients, and family members in the context of the ethical principles of Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy, and Justice.
Your analysis should be comprehensive, providing specific examples from the case study to support your observations. Furthermore, you are expected to integrate insights from the Christian worldview, explaining how this perspective influences the prioritization and application of ethical principles in the given healthcare scenario.
Detailed Assessment Instructions for the PHI 413V RS Applying the Four Principles Case Study Assignment
Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative – Applying the Four Principles: Case Study
This assignment will incorporate a common practical tool in helping clinicians begin to ethically analyze a case. Organizing the data in this way will help you apply the four principles of principlism.
Based on the “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” and other required topic study materials, you will complete the “Applying the Four Principles: Case Study” document that includes the following:
Part 1: Chart
This chart will formalize principlism and the four-boxes approach by organizing the data from the case study according to the relevant principles of biomedical ethics: autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. Applying the Four Principles: Case Study.
Part 2: Evaluation
This part includes questions, to be answered in a total of 500 words, that describe how principalism would be applied according to the Christian worldview.
Remember to support your responses with the topic study materials.
APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
PHI 413V RS Applying the Four Principles Case Study Example
Part 1: Chart (60 points)
Based on the “Healing and Autonomy” case study, complete the relevant boxes as follows:
| Ethical Principles | Actions in the Case Study |
| Medical Indications | Beneficence and Nonmaleficence |
| – Suggested immediate dialysis for James during the first visit due to elevated blood pressure and fluid buildup. | |
| – Placed James on regular dialysis during the second visit to stabilize his deteriorating condition. | |
| – Proposed a kidney transplant to be performed within the next year despite James being in a stable state currently. | |
| – Informed Mike and Joanne that the church members were not potential donors due to a mismatch of their tissues. | |
| – Suggested for Mike and Joanne a donor that was an ideal tissue match, James’ brother Samuel. | |
| Patient Preferences | Autonomy |
| – The physician did not interrupt when Mike and Joane were making decisions regarding James’ medication. | |
| – The physician did not interrupt when Mike and Joane were deciding to forego the dialysis and place their faith in God. | |
| – The physician did not interrupt when Mike and Joane were deciding whether to let Samuel donate a kidney to James or wait for God to perform a miracle. | |
| Quality of Life | Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy |
| Contextual Features | Justice and Fairness |
| – The physician did not consider Mike or Joanne as ideal kidney donors to James since they were not compatible donors. | |
| – The physician did not consider any of the church members as an ideal donor since their tissues did not match with those of James. | |
| – Advised Mike and Joanne to ensure a kidney transplant was done in the next year despite James’ current stable state. | |
| – Proposed Samuel as an ideal kidney donor. | |
| – Allowed Mike and Joanne to make a decision about Samuel donating one of his kidneys to his brother, James. | |
| Contextual Features | Justice and Fairness |
| – The physician allowed James to use the dialysis machine, performing daily rounds to stabilize his condition. |
Part 2: Evaluation
In 200-250 words, answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, which of the four principles is most pressing in this case? Explain why. (45 points)
In the context of the Christian worldview, the principle of autonomy takes precedence in this case. Autonomy, as defined by Singh and Ivory (2015), asserts that individuals have the right to independence, self-determination, and the freedom to make their own choices without external influence. This principle extends to the healthcare sector, emphasizing that clients, including parents like Mike and Joane in this case, possess the right to make decisions about their health without undue influence.
Given that James is a minor, the Christian worldview still upholds the autonomy of his parents in making decisions on his behalf. The physician, recognizing this, respects their autonomy even when there is a misalignment with his professional recommendations. For instance, when the physician suggested immediate dialysis due to James’s deteriorating condition, he did not interrupt or coerce Mike and Joane when they chose to take James home and rely on faith for a miracle. Similarly, when the decision involved whether Samuel should donate a kidney or wait for a divine intervention, the physician refrained from influencing the choice, respecting the autonomy of Mike and Joane.
Although these decisions may be deemed risky and potentially harmful to James’s well-being, the Christian worldview places a high value on autonomy, allowing individuals the freedom to exercise their beliefs and make decisions in alignment with their faith. In this case, autonomy emerges as the most pressing principle, highlighting the Christian perspective that respects the independence and decision-making authority of individuals, even when faced with critical healthcare choices.
In 200-250 words, answer the following: According to the Christian worldview, how might a Christian rank the priority of the four principles? Explain why. (45 points)
In a Christian worldview, the principles would be ranked in a specific order. The primary consideration would be given to the principle of Non-maleficence, as advocated by Ediger (2015). This principle emphasizes the importance of minimizing harm and ensuring that healthcare procedures are as non-harmful as possible to achieve optimal results. Christians would prioritize procedures and interventions that prioritize the well-being of the individual, seeking to do no harm in the pursuit of medical care.
The second-ranking principle would be justice or fairness, in accordance with the belief that individuals are entitled to benefit from advancements in fields such as psychology or healthcare (Al-Bar & Chamsi-Pasha, 2015). This principle aligns with the Christian perspective of embracing technological progress and incorporating it into healthcare practices, ensuring that individuals receive fair and just treatment.
The principle of beneficence, which promotes actions with good intentions towards patients, would be the third in the hierarchy. Christians would consider decisions that bring about the most benefits, aligning with the ethical consideration of doing good for the well-being of the patient.
Autonomy, the principle emphasizing the right to independence, self-determination, and freedom to make choices without external influence, would be ranked last in this Christian framework. The rationale is that, especially in the case of minors like James, parents are entitled to the independence of thought and action in making healthcare decisions (Case Study on Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative). However, it’s crucial to note that this order doesn’t diminish the importance of autonomy but reflects a particular Christian perspective that places a higher priority on minimizing harm, ensuring justice, and promoting beneficence in the healthcare context. This ranking underscores the Christian emphasis on seeking the best outcomes for individuals while respecting autonomy within the boundaries of faith-based decision-making.
References:
Al-Bar, M. A., & Chamsi-Pasha, H. (2015). Beneficence. In Contemporary Bioethics (pp. 129-139). Springer, Cham.
APA. (2020). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct: Including 2010 and 2016 Amendments. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/ethics/code/
Young, G. (2017). The Five Core and the Five Supplementary Ethical Principles and Their Sub-principles. In Revising the APA Ethics Code (pp. 63-91). Springer, Cham.
Boost Your Academic Potential with nursingessayservices.com – Your Ultimate Nursing Writing Companion!
Are nursing assignments overwhelming you? Don’t stress – we’ve got the perfect solution for you at nursingessayservices.com, the leading nursing paper writing service! Crafting an exceptional nursing essay just got easier with our expert writers who specialize in delivering top-notch, customized papers tailored to your unique instructions.
Are you struggling with a challenging topic or facing a tight deadline? Fear not! Our dedicated team of professional essay writers is here to help you overcome any obstacle. At nursingessayservices.com, we pride ourselves on being the best place to buy nursing papers, providing a reliable and affordable solution for all college students.
Why choose us? Our online nursing papers are not only of the highest quality but also available at budget-friendly prices. We understand the importance of originality, and our experts guarantee plagiarism-free papers that secure the grades you deserve.
Ready to take the first step toward academic success? Placing your order is a breeze – simply visit our “Place Order” page, fill in the details for your paper, proceed to checkout, and let our pro writers handle the rest.
Don’t wait until the last minute; entrust your work to nursingessayservices.com and experience the convenience of getting top-notch nursing papers delivered ASAP.
Let nursingessayservices.com be your academic partner, saving you time for what matters most!
Is this the question you were looking for? If so, place your order here to get started!
