Assessment 3: Case NarrativesType:Case Studies.Weighting:40%Method:IndependentLength:1000 words +/- 10% foreachcase narrative (in-text citations included...

1 answer below »















Assessment 3: Case Narratives







Type:Case Studies.







Weighting:40%







Method:Independent







Length:1000 words +/- 10% for


each


case narrative (in-text citations included in word limit)







Submission type:Word file (.docx) via Canvas Dropbox








Unit Learning Outcomes assessed:







  1. Analyse ethical dimensions of practice using multiple perspectives;



  2. Discuss and apply the law and legal frameworks as they apply to healthcare practice;






Assessment description




The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate your understanding of legal and ethical principles in application to clinical practice.




This assessment will be based on two (2) clinical narratives and presented in the form of case studies.




Assessment instructions




You are required to develop separate case studies for all two (2) case narratives.




In each case study, students are required to respond to the following tasks:







  1. Identify and discuss the ethical dilemma within the case narrative.



  2. Analyse three (3) key legal and/or ethical considerations within the case study (informed by legislation and policy) and consider the multiple perspectives present within the case.



  3. Using a legal/ethical decision-making framework and focusing on safety and quality in healthcare, discuss how the case study would inform your own future health care practice, with reference to codes, guidelines and policy specific to your future profession.






The total word limit for each case study is 1000 words (+/-10 %), this is inclusive of intext citations and headings used. The word count does not include the reference list.










Case narrative 1:











You are working in a rehabilitation unit, and today you are scheduled to assist Alex with a routine procedure. Upon entering their room, you find Alex lying in bed, packing their belongings. They inform you that they refuse to undergo the procedure, stating that they have been in the rehabilitation unit for over a year—far longer than they deem necessary. Alex expresses a deep longing to return to his home, where their eight dogs and four cats await them. Alex feels that the companionship of their pets and the comfort of their home will do more for their well-being than continued rehabilitation. Alex refuses to listen to you explain why the procedure is necessary or why their health may be at risk if they do not stay in the unit.














Case narrative 2:











You have been working at a clinic and the team made a video raising awareness about a public health topic that is very close to everyone’s heart. The video made was very fun and light-hearted content and went viral, receiving over 100, 000 views in 24 hours. The video was taken by yourself and shows your colleagues dancing and promoting health promotion and raising awareness of early health prevention, as well as the clinic that you work at. When you look at the video the next day, you look closer and realise that right in the back of the video for a few seconds is a man sitting on a bench crying into his hands. The video was taken outside, but you think this man might be a patient’s partner whose had received bad news that day. You go to your colleagues about the video and the fact that a few comments have noticed the man. Your colleagues tell you to delete the comments, the man is barely noticeable in the back of the video, it is only a few seconds, and you cannot see his face as it is covered. You are unsure what to do. Your clinic has been fully booked all week with new patients and people are taking your health awareness campaign very seriously because of the video.




Assessment formatting guidelines







  • File type: Electronic document (.docx)



  • APA 7thstyle, including references.



  • Cover sheet (with assignment title, student number and word count for each case narrative)



  • Students' names are not to be included on any assessment tasks/submissions. Only student ID numbers should be included (as per theAssessment PolicyandAssessment Procedures).



  • Please note this assessment will be reviewed by the University’s plagiarism checking software (Turnitin) and, with reasonable grounds, be subject to further inquiry through the Office of the Associate Dean of Education. As with all academic assessments, students are required to comply with the University's policy and procedure for assessment items, inclusive of ensuring academic integrity of their work. All work must be the student’s original work.Students must not use artificial intelligence platforms and services in the preparation and completion of the assessment.

























Rubric













11961 Assignment 3 Rubric 2024














































































































































































































11961 Assignment 3 Rubric 2024





CriteriaRatingsPts












This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 1a: Case Study 1


Ethical dilemma within the case narrative is introduced, identified, and described.































































5Pts



Full marks



Outstanding, well-articulated, introduction with clear identification and description of the ethical dilemma present in the narrative.
























4Pts



Exceeds expectations



Very good introduction, identification and description of the ethical dilemma present in the scenario.
























3Pts



Meets expectations



Good introduction of case narrative with ethical dilemma mostly introduced, identified, and explored.
























2Pts



Developing



Limited introduction, identification, and description of the ethical dilemma within the case narrative.
























1Pts



Unsatisfactory



Unsatisfactory understanding of the ethical dilemma present within in the case.
























0Pts



No marks



Criterion not addressed.


















5pts


















This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 1b: Case study 1


Analysis of three (3) key legal and ethical considerations, with a focus on relevant legal principles, laws and/or ethical dimensions from multiple perspectives in relation to the provided clinical narrative.































































15Pts



Full marks



Outstanding, well-articulated analysis of three key legal and ethical considerations with multiple perspectives considered. Three key areas described provide outstanding depth and critical thinking in relation to the case narrative provided, without assumptions or bias present. No mistakes or omissions.
























12Pts



Exceeds expectations



Very good analysis of three key legal and ethical considerations with multiple perspectives considered. Three key areas described provide very good depth and critical thinking in relation to the case narrative provided, without assumptions or bias present. Minimal mistakes or omissions.
























9Pts



Meets expectations



Good analysis of three key legal and ethical considerations with multiple perspectives mostly considered. Relevant legal principles, laws and/or ethical dimensions are mostly considered, with some evidence of critical thinking in relation to the case narrative provided. Some mistakes, omissions, assumptions, and/or bias made.
























6Pts



Developing



Limited analysis of three or less key legal and ethical considerations and/or limited exploration of multiple perspectives. Limited evidence of critical thinking in relation to the case narrative provided. Significant assumptions, biases, mistakes, and/or omissions.
























3Pts



Unsatisfactory



Unsatisfactory analysis of up to three key legal and ethical considerations and/or no exploration of multiple perspectives. Assumptions and/or biases have been made and multiple perspectives have not been considered.
























0Pts



No marks



Criterion not addressed.


















15pts


















This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 1c: Case study 1


Ethical decision-making framework is used to demonstrate applicability of scenario to future self- practice within own health profession, with reference to codes, guidelines and policy.































































20Pts



Full marks



Outstanding, well-articulated use of ethical decision-making framework within case narrative to inform future self-practice, with outstanding and clear linkage to relevant ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies.
























16Pts



Exceeds expectations



Very good use of ethical decision-making framework within case narrative to inform future self-practice, with very good linkage to relevant ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies.
























12Pts



Meets expectations



Good use of ethical decision-making framework within case narrative to inform future self-practice with relevant ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies mostly linked.
























8Pts



Developing



Partial use of ethical decision-making framework within case narrative to inform future self-practice, and/or limited linkage to appropriate ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies.
























4Pts



Unsatisfactory



Unsatisfactory use of ethical decision-making framework to link case narrative to future self-practice in healthcare and/or limited use of limited to no use of ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies relevant to future practice.
























0Pts



No marks



Criterion not addressed.


















20pts


















This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 2a: Case Study 2


Ethical dilemma within the case narrative is introduced, identified, and described.































































5Pts



Full marks



Outstanding, well-articulated, introduction with clear identification and description of the ethical dilemma present in the narrative.
























4Pts



Exceeds expectations



Very good introduction, identification and description of the ethical dilemma present in the scenario.
























3Pts



Meets expectations



Good introduction of case narrative with ethical dilemma mostly introduced, identified, and explored.
























2Pts



Developing



Limited introduction, identification, and description of the ethical dilemma within the case narrative.
























1Pts



Unsatisfactory



Unsatisfactory understanding of the ethical dilemma present within in the case.
























0Pts



No marks



Criterion not addressed.


















5pts


















This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 2b: Case study 2


Analysis of three (3) key legal and ethical considerations, with a focus on relevant legal principles, laws and/or ethical dimensions from multiple perspectives in relation to the provided clinical narrative.































































15Pts



Full marks



Outstanding, well-articulated analysis of three key legal and ethical considerations with multiple perspectives considered. Three key areas described provide outstanding depth and critical thinking in relation to the case narrative provided, without assumptions or bias present. No mistakes or omissions.
























12Pts



Exceeds expectations



Very good analysis of three key legal and ethical considerations with multiple perspectives considered. Three key areas described provide very good depth and critical thinking in relation to the case narrative provided, without assumptions or bias present. Minimal mistakes or omissions.
























9Pts



Meets expectations



Good analysis of three key legal and ethical considerations with multiple perspectives mostly considered. Relevant legal principles, laws and/or ethical dimensions are mostly considered, with some evidence of critical thinking in relation to the case narrative provided. Some mistakes, omissions, assumptions, and/or bias made.
























6Pts



Developing



Limited analysis of three or less key legal and ethical considerations and/or limited exploration of multiple perspectives. Limited evidence of critical thinking in relation to the case narrative provided. Significant assumptions, biases, mistakes, and/or omissions.
























3Pts



Unsatisfactory



Unsatisfactory analysis of up to three key legal and ethical considerations and/or no exploration of multiple perspectives. Assumptions and/or biases have been made and multiple perspectives have not been considered.
























0Pts



No marks



Criterion not addressed.


















15pts


















This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 2c: Case study 2


Ethical decision-making framework is used to demonstrate applicability of scenario to future self- practice within own health profession, with reference to codes, guidelines and policy.































































20Pts



Full marks



Outstanding, well-articulated use of ethical decision-making framework within case narrative to inform future self-practice, with outstanding and clear linkage to relevant ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies.
























16Pts



Exceeds expectations



Very good use of ethical decision-making framework within case narrative to inform future self-practice, with very good linkage to relevant ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies.
























12Pts



Meets expectations



Good use of ethical decision-making framework within case narrative to inform future self-practice with relevant ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies mostly linked.
























8Pts



Developing



Partial use of ethical decision-making framework within case narrative to inform future self-practice, and/or limited linkage to appropriate ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies.
























4Pts



Unsatisfactory



Unsatisfactory use of ethical decision-making framework to link case narrative to future self-practice in healthcare and/or limited use of limited to no use of ethical principles, codes, guidelines, and policies relevant to future practice.
























0Pts



No marks



Criterion not addressed.


















20pts


















This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 3: Scholarly approach to assignment


Scholarly academic writing using evidence to inform arguments, support definitions and an ethical approach to using the ideas and academic work of others.
Evidence of relevant literature used to support discussion includes:
Current evidence-based practice guidelines, standards of practice, codes; Relevant, peer-reviewed academic literature published within five (5) years, 2019-2024; Legislation and case law, seminal works where relevant.































































5Pts



Full marks



Outstanding use of evidence to inform arguments, support definitions and adhere to an ethical approach when using the ideas and work of others. Evidence is current and applicable to case narratives.
























4Pts



Exceeds expectations



Very good use of evidence to inform arguments, support definitions and adhere to an ethical approach when using the ideas and work of others. Evidence is current and relevant to case narratives with minor errors, which do not detract from the applicability of the work.
























3Pts



Meets expectations



Good use of evidence to inform arguments, support definitions and adhere to an ethical approach when using the ideas and work of others. Evidence is current and mostly relevant to case narratives with some errors and/or omissions which somewhat detracts from the applicability of the work.
























2Pts



Developing



Partial use of evidence to inform arguments, support definitions and adhere to an ethical approach when using the ideas and work of others. Not all evidence used is current and/or relevant to case narratives with frequent errors and/or omissions which detract from the applicability of the work.
























1Pts



Unsatisfactory



Unsatisfactory use of evidence to inform arguments, support definitions and adhere to an ethical approach when using the ideas and work of others. Evidence used is not current and/or relevant to case narratives with significant errors and/or omissions which significantly detracts from the applicability of the work.
























0Pts



No marks



Criterion not addressed.


















5pts


















This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 4: Scholarly approach to assignment


Answers are informative, concise, and structured with an introductory statement, an informative discussion, and a concluding statement.
Responses are written with minimal grammatical/spelling errors.































































5Pts



Full marks



Outstanding adherence to academic language principles including (but not limited to) sentence and paragraph structuring, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and terminology.
























4Pts



Exceeds expectations



Excellent adherence to academic language principles including (but not limited to) sentence and paragraph structuring, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and terminology.
























3Pts



Meets expectations



Good adherence to academic language principles including (but not limited to) sentence and paragraph structuring, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and terminology.
























2Pts



Developing



Partial adherence to academic language principles including (but not limited to) sentence and paragraph structuring, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and terminology.
























1Pts



Unsatisfactory



Partial adherence to academic language principles including (but not limited to) sentence and paragraph structuring, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and terminology.
























0Pts



No marks



Criterion not addressed.


















5pts


















This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 5: Scholarly approach to assignment


Assignment is formatted as per APA guidelines (Times new roman font, size 12, double spacing, margins 2.54cm, first line in paragraph indented, student number and page number in top right corner).
Referencing follows APA 7th Style, including, but not limited to correct use of intext citations, reference list commences on new page at the end of the document.































































5Pts



Full marks



Outstanding adherence to APA 7th edition with no errors or omissions.
























4Pts



Exceeds expectations



Very good adherence to APA 7th edition with minimal errors or omissions that do not detract from the academic validity of the work.
























3Pts



Meets expectations



Good adherence to APA 7th edition with some errors or omissions which minorly detract from the academic validity of the work.
























2Pts



Developing



Partial adherence to APA 7th edition but errors or omissions present throughout which detract from the academic validity of the work.
























1Pts



Unsatisfactory



Unsatisfactory adherence to APA 7th edition, with significant errors and omissions that detract from the academic validity of the work.
























0Pts



No marks



Criterion not addressed.


















5pts


















This criterion is linked to a learning outcome





Criteria 6: Presentation


A Cover Page is included with assessment title, student ID number, actual word count.
Word count is followed (1000 +/- 10% per case narrative)






















































5Pts



Full marks



Completed cover page is present. Word count is followed
























2.5Pts



Developing



Completed cover page is absent, or word count is not followed.
























0Pts



No marks



Cover page is absent and word count is not followed.


















5pts









Total points:100










































Answered 4 days AfterJul 10, 2024

Answer To: Assessment 3: Case NarrativesType:Case...

Dilpreet answered on Jul 14 2024
4 Votes
Case Narratives        2
    
ASSESSMENT 3: CASE NARRATIVES
Table of Contents
Introduction    3
Case Study 1: Identification of Ethical Dilemma in Rehabilitation Unit    3
Key Legal and Ethical Considerations    3
Application to Future Healthcare Practices
    4
Case Study 2: Ethical Dilemma in Public Health Campaign    5
Key Ethical and Legal Considerations    5
Application to Future Health Practices    5
Conclusion    6
References    7
Introduction
    Ethical dilemma in the field of healthcare can be described as a situation, wherein a choice has to be made between competing values, and the choice made is bound have its own consequences, irrespective of what has been chosen. Through this case study narrative an effort has been made to understand legal and ethical principles in application to clinical practice. Here, the identified ethical dilemma within the case narratives will be discussed followed by analysis of the key legal and ethical considerations. Furthermore, inferences made from the case study will be discussed to guide my own future healthcare practices.
Case Study 1: Identification of Ethical Dilemma in Rehabilitation Unit
    The given case study explores the case of Alex, who is a patient in rehabilitation centre. He refuses to undergo medical procedures, which are necessary for his well-being despite knowing the importance of these procedures. Ethical dilemma in this case can be noticed in the situation, where Alex’s autonomy and his decision of not undergoing the treatment needs to be respected while on the other side it is the duty of the healthcare provider to follow necessary medical procedures to ensure the well-being of the patient.
Key Legal and Ethical Considerations
    Key legal and ethical considerations in the case study have been identified as:
Autonomy: This is one of the fundamental principles in patient care, which takes into consideration the rights of the patient to make informed decisions about their own health (Varkey, 2021). This principle ensures that consent or informed agreement of the patient is taken before any investigation or medical procedure. In this case, Alex’s informed decision to not undergo the medical procedure must be respected owing to this autonomy.
Beneficence and Non-Maleficence: Beneficence for medical practitioners refers to as a deed performed to ensure benefits of the patient (Cheraghi et al., 2023). Whereas, Non-Maleficence refers to refraining from activities, which may harm the...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here