NUR 601 Week 3 Discussion 1: Borderline Case: Ethics of Patient Care
Schenell, R., Ozanne, A., Strang, S., & Henoch, I. (2020). To make and execute decisions throughout life: A person-centred model that facilitates self-determination in residential care, developed through participatory research. Applied Nursing Research, 55, N.PAG.
Schuurmans, J., Vos, S., Vissers, P., Tilburgs, B., & Engels, Y. (2020). Supporting GPs around euthanasia requests from people with dementia: a qualitative analysis of Dutch nominal group meetings. British Journal of General Practice, 70(700), e833–e842.
Sulmasy, D. P. (2020). Why Dementia‐Specific Advance Directives Are a Misguided Idea. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 68(7), 1603–1605.
Wilkinson J. (1997). Professional issues. Developing a concept analysis of autonomy in nursing practice. British Journal of Nursing, 6(12), 703–707.
Initial Post
Please respond to the following prompts:
- 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..
Reply Posts
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 for details on how this activity will be graded. The described expectations meet the passing level of 80 percent.
Posting to the Discussion Forum
- Select the appropriate Thread.
- Select Reply.
- Create your post.
- Select Post to Forum.
The purpose of this week’s discussion is to apply Walker and Avant’s defining attributes of concept analysis to an actual patient case. The assignment is titled Borderline Case: Ethics of Patient Care. According to Khan et al., (2019), the product of the defining attributes helps to determine the concepts meaning (p. 114), which we will analyze in this discussion. The NPR video ‘If you have dementia, can
you hasten death as you wish?’ discussed a case of a nurse with dementia at near end of life. In this video, a case is presented of a nurse by the name of Margaret Bentley, who several years prior to presenting with Alzheimer’s disease, stated in a living will that if she ever became critically disabled, she did not want to eat or drink, then she would prefer to die (Henig, 2015). The family of Margaret Bentley is advocating to honor her wishes as they believe she now meets her own criteria to choose end of life over continuing to live. The nursing home of which she resides disagrees with the family’s choice to end her life based on her wishes, because the nursing home believes that by opening her mouth when a spoon with food is placed before her mouth signifies that she still wants to eat. Margaret’s family believes that this is only a reflex. The nursing home believes that this is Margaret displaying a will to live, by opening her mouth and wanting to eat (Henig, 2015).
The fact that Margaret was a former registered nurse meets defining attribute 1, which states: practices within a professional context which is self-regulating (Wilkinson, 1997, p.704). According to Wilkinson (1997) the definition of the 2nd defining attribute is “makes decisions which are based on professional judgement and is able to act on these within his/her own sphere of practice” (p.704). In this case, Margaret was able to make her decision to end her life if she met her criteria of not wanting to eat or drink. Because Margaret was a registered nurse and of sound mind when writing her end of life wishes, her decision was made from professional judgement presumptively based on her experiences as a registered nurse. This case becomes borderline when looking at the 3rd defining attribute which is: “is cognizant with determining forces and has the knowledge to judge when these should be acquiesced, and when they should be challenged (Wilkinson, 1997, P. 704). This presents an ethical issue over whether Margaret should live or die. One could argue here that by opening her mouth to accept being spoon fed nutrition is showing a will to live, even though Margaret is unable to be cognizant of those prior wishes, secondary to her advanced stage of Alzheimer’s disease. Also, the verbiage Margaret stated in her living will that if she met her criteria of “not wanting to eat or drink” leaves much room for interpretation.
According to Walker & Avant, (1997) a model case consists of 3 attributes which are covering, protection, and rebalancing (p.164). A borderline case will contain most of the defining attributes of the concepts being studied but not all of them (p. 164). In the case of Margaret Bentley, this is a borderline case because the case only partially reflects the defining attributes of the concept and is hence inconsistent with its full representation (Wilkinson, 1997, p.705). In order to make this a model case, the meaning of “not wanting” to eat or drink would need to be more clearly defined. Perhaps it could have been written in a way that clearly defined that if she was unable to feed herself, then she would prefer to die. This would leave little room for interpretation and her wishes could be met.
References:
Hening, R. M. (2015, February 10). If you have dementia, can you hasten death as you wished? All Things Considered.
Kahn, T.S., Hirschman, K.B., McHugh, M.D., & Naylor, M.D. (2020). Self-efficacy of family caregivers of older adults with cognitive impairment: A concept analysis. Nursing Forum, 56. 112-
Note: 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)
Important information for writing discussion questions and participation
Welcome to class
Hello class and welcome to the class and I will be your instructor for this course. This is a -week course and requires a lot of time commitment, organization, and a high level of dedication. Please use the class syllabus to guide you through all the assignments required for the course. I have also attached the classroom policies to this announcement to know your expectations for this course. Please review this document carefully and ask me any questions if you do. You could email me at any time or send me a message via the “message” icon in halo if you need to contact me. I check my email regularly, so you should get a response within 24 hours. If you have not heard from me within 24 hours and need to contact me urgently, please send a follow up text to
I strongly encourage that you do not wait until the very last minute to complete your assignments. Your assignments in weeks 4 and 5 require early planning as you would need to present a teaching plan and interview a community health provider. I advise you look at the requirements for these assignments at the beginning of the course and plan accordingly. I have posted the YouTube link that explains all the class assignments in detail. It is required that you watch this 32-minute video as the assignments from week 3 through 5 require that you follow the instructions to the letter to succeed. Failure to complete these assignments according to instructions might lead to a zero. After watching the video, please schedule a one-on-one with me to discuss your topic for your project by the second week of class. Use this link to schedule a 15-minute session. Please, call me at the time of your appointment on my number. Please note that I will NOT call you.
Please, be advised I do NOT accept any assignments by email. If you are having technical issues with uploading an assignment, contact the technical department and inform me of the issue. If you have any issues that would prevent you from getting your assignments to me by the deadline, please inform me to request a possible extension. Note that working fulltime or overtime is no excuse for late assignments. There is a 5%-point deduction for every day your assignment is late. This only applies to approved extensions. Late assignments will not be accepted.
If you think you would be needing accommodations due to any reasons, please contact the appropriate department to request accommodations.
Plagiarism is highly prohibited. Please ensure you are citing your sources correctly using APA 7th edition. All assignments including discussion posts should be formatted in APA with the appropriate spacing, font, margin, and indents. Any papers not well formatted would be returned back to you, hence, I advise you review APA formatting style. I have attached a sample paper in APA format and will also post sample discussion responses in subsequent announcements.
Your initial discussion post should be a minimum of 200 words and response posts should be a minimum of 150 words. Be advised that I grade based on quality and not necessarily the number of words you post. A minimum of TWO references should be used for your initial post. For your response post, you do not need references as personal experiences would count as response posts. If you however cite anything from the literature for your response post, it is required that you cite your reference. You should include a minimum of THREE references for papers in this course. Please note that references should be no more than 5 years old except recommended as a resource for the class. Furthermore, for each discussion board question, you need ONE initial substantive response and TWO substantive responses to either your classmates or your instructor for a total of THREE responses. There are TWO discussion questions each week, hence, you need a total minimum of SIX discussion posts for each week. I usually post a discussion question each week. You could also respond to these as it would count towards your required SIX discussion posts for the week.
I understand this is a lot of information to cover in 5 weeks, however, the Bible says in Philippians 4:13 that we can do all things through Christ that strengthens us. Even in times like this, we are encouraged by God’s word that we have that ability in us to succeed with His strength. I pray that each and every one of you receives strength for this course and life generally as we navigate through this pandemic that is shaking our world today. Relax and enjoy the course!
Hi Class,
Please read through the following information on writing a Discussion question response and participation posts.
Contact me if you have any questions.
Important information on Writing a Discussion Question
- Your response needs to be a minimum of 150 words (not including your list of references)
- There needs to be at least TWO references with ONE being a peer reviewed professional journal article.
- Include in-text citations in your response
- Do not include quotes—instead summarize and paraphrase the information
- Follow APA-7th edition
- Points will be deducted if the above is not followed
Participation –replies to your classmates or instructor
- A minimum of 6 responses per week, on at least 3 days of the week.
- Each response needs at least ONE reference with citations—best if it is a peer reviewed journal article
- Each response needs to be at least 75 words in length (does not include your list of references)
- Responses need to be substantive by bringing information to the discussion or further enhance the discussion. Responses of “I agree” or “great post” does not count for the word count.
- Follow APA 7th edition
- Points will be deducted if the above is not followed
- Remember to use and follow APA-7th edition for all weekly assignments, discussion questions, and participation points.
- Here are some helpful links
- The is a great resource
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 importantpoints.
Meets all requirements within the discussion instructions. Cites two references. 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. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points |
Absent application to evidence-based practice, theory, or role development. Synthesis of course content is superficial.
Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No references cited. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points |
40 |
Peer Response Post | Offers both supportive and alternative viewpoints to the discussion, using two or more scholarly references per peer post. Post provides additional value to the conversation.
All instruction requirements noted. 40 points |
Evidence of further synthesis of course content. Provides clarification and new information or insight related to the content of the peer’s post.
Response is supported by course content and a minimum of one scholarly reference per each peer post. All instruction requirements noted. 35 points |
Lacks clarification or new information. Scholarly reference supports the content in the peer post without adding new information or insight.
Missing reference from one peer post. Partially followed instructions regarding number of reply posts. Most instruction requirements are noted. 31 points |
Post is primarily a summation of peer’s post without further synthesis of course content.
Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. Did not follow instructions regarding number of reply posts. Missing reference from peer posts. Missing several instruction requirements. Submits post late. 27 points |
40 |
Frequency of Distribution | Initial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days.
All instruction requirements noted. 10 points |
Initial post and peer post(s) made on multiple separate days.
8 points |
Minimum of two post options (initial and/or peer) made on separate days.
7 points |
All posts made on same day.
Submission demonstrates inadequate preparation. No post submitted. 6 points |
10 |
Organization | Well-organized content with a clear and complex purpose statement and content argument. Writing is concise with a logical flow of ideas.
5 points |
Organized content with an informative purpose statement, supportive content, and summary statement. Argument content is developed with minimal issues in content flow.
4 points |
Poor organization and flow of ideas distract from content. Narrative is difficult to follow and frequently causes reader to reread work.
Purpose statement is noted. 3 points |
Illogical flow of ideas. Prose rambles. Purpose statement is unclear or missing.
Demonstrates incomplete understanding of content and/or inadequate preparation. No purpose statement. Submits assignment late. 2 points |
5 |
APA, Grammar, and Spelling | Correct APA formatting with no errors.
The writer correctly identifies reading audience, as demonstrated by appropriate language (avoids jargon and simplifies complex concepts appropriately). Writing is concise, in active voice, and avoids awkward transitions and overuse of conjunctions. There are no spelling, punctuation, or word-usage errors. 5 points |
Correct and consistent APA formatting of references and cites all references used. No more than two unique APA errors.
The writer demonstrates correct usage of formal English language in sentence construction. Variation in sentence structure and word usage promotes readability. There are minimal to no grammar, punctuation, or word-usage errors. 4 points |
Three to four unique APA formatting errors.
The writer occasionally uses awkward sentence construction or overuses/inappropriately uses complex sentence structure. Problems with word usage (evidence of incorrect use of thesaurus) and punctuation persist, often causing some difficulties with grammar. Some words, transitional phrases, and conjunctions are overused. Multiple grammar, punctuation, or word usage errors. 3 points |
Five or more unique formatting errors or no attempt to format in APA.
The writer demonstrates limited understanding of formal written language use; writing is colloquial (conforms to spoken language). The writer struggles with limited vocabulary and has difficulty conveying meaning such that only the broadest, most general messages are presented. Grammar and punctuation are consistently incorrect. Spelling errors are numerous. Submits assignment late. 2 points |
5 |
Total Points | 100 |