Due: In an effort to facilitate scholarly discourse, create your initial post by Day 3, and reply to at least two of your classmates, on two separate days, by Day 7. For this discussion, you will be applying defining attributes to an actual patient case. Please listen to the NPR podcast If You Have Dementia Can You Hasten Death As You Wished? (4:00 minutes). Additionally review Wilkinson’s (1997) defining attributes in Developing a Concept Analysis of Autonomy in Nursing Practice. Review Wilkinson’s (1997) defining attributes and describe how the NPR podcast If You Have Dementia Can You Hasten Death As You Wished? case story meets the definition of a borderline case., Describe the ethical issues the case raises., If it were changed to meet criteria for a model case what ethical issues would come to the forefront? Your initial post should contain two- to three-paragraphs with three- to four-sentences per paragraph. The post should integrate a minimum of three readings and/or other evidence-based research articles no more than three years old and use APA formatting for citations and references. Compare and contrast your ethical viewpoint, using a minimum of two scholarly sources using APA style, with two of your colleagues. Please refer to the Grading Rubric for details on how this activity will be graded. The described expectations meet the passing level of 80 percent.

Borderline Case: Ethics of Patient CareNote: Scholarly resources are defined as evidence-based practice, peer-reviewed journals; textbook (do not rely solely on your textbook as a reference); and National Standard Guidelines. Review assignment instructions, as this will provide any additional requirements that are not specifically listed on the rubric. Note: The value of each of the criterion on this rubric represents a point range. (example: 17-0 points)

Discussion Question Rubric – 100 Points

Criteria Exemplary

Exceeds Expectations Advanced

Meets Expectations Intermediate

Needs Improvement Novice

Inadequate Total Points

Quality of Initial Post Provides clear examples supported by course content and references. Cites three or more references, using at least one new scholarly resource that was not provided in the course materials. All instruction requirements noted. 40 points Components are accurate and thoroughly represented, with explanations and application of knowledge to include evidence-based practice, ethics, theory, and/or role. Synthesizes course content using course materials and scholarly resources to support important points. 35 points Components are accurate and mostly represented primarily with definitions and summarization. Ideas may be overstated, with minimal contribution to the subject matter. Minimal application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is present but missing depth and/or development. Is missing one component/requirement of the discussion instructions. Cites one reference, or references do not clearly support content.





Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *