coursework-banner

NURS 8000 Discussion: Ethics

NURS 8000 Discussion: Ethics

NURS 8000 Discussion: Ethics

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: on NURS 8000 Discussion: Ethics

As referenced in Week 2, Discussion 2, nurses are perceived as having very high ethical standards (Gallup, 2013). Doctorally prepared nurses should be able to consider ethical issues from multiple viewpoints. In this week’s media presentation, the experts discuss ethical challenges encountered by nurses as they assume leadership positions and as they engage in research.

The success of healthcare organizations in reaching economic, patient happiness, and quality of care goals is mostly determined by nursing leadership’s leadership qualities (Anders et al., 2021). A successful nurse leader combines the attributes shown by managers and leaders to direct and implement changes, bring innovation, empower those around them. A nurse leader is able to use the influence and power vested upon them by colleagues to bring practical changes to improve practice and quality of care. Nurse leaders can assess and evaluate, create interventions where needed and promote critical thinking processes.

Week 5 Discussion

Nurses are important links in healthcare delivery considering that they interact most with the patients. The interactions subject them to high cases of the ethical dilemma of which they are expected to uphold high standards of ethical values. The DNP nurses encounter various ethical issues including a case where a nurse prescribes a medication to the patient but the patient does not want to take the medicine because their cultural values do not allow it (Haahr et al., 2019). A second example involves a scenario where research practices where the nurse may explore social patterns and how they affect health outcomes. In this case, the nurse may focus on the sexual orientation and while the study aims at providing useful information for EBP implementation, it could expose the participants’ sexual identity and thus compromise the need for confidentiality (Van der et al., 2017).

The nurses must evaluate their practices to ensure that their actions result in no harm to the patients. The issues encountered by the DNP nurse are similar to the once experienced in the course of practice; though, the issues related to the research may be more challenging. For example, while it is important to keep the patients’ information confidential, the healthcare providers have also to share such data in determining the determinants of health and appropriate health interventions to engage in (Aitamaa et al., 2019). Furthermore, the issue of cultural differences is common and all healthcare providers are likely to encounter them (Rainer et al., 2018).

In conclusion, ethical principles guide healthcare providers on how to address emerging ethical issues. Ethical issues are prone in the healthcare system and so nurses and other healthcare providers must be prepared to handle them in the right way possible without compromising the patients’ values and dignity.

NURS 8000 Discussion: Ethics Reference

Aitamaa, E., Suhonen, R., Puukka, P., & Leino-Kilpi, H. (2019). Ethical problems in nursing management – a cross-sectional survey about solving problems. BMC Health Services Research19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4245-4

Haahr, A., Norlyk, A., Martinsen, B., & Dreyer, P. (2019). Nurses’ experiences of ethical dilemmas: A review. Nursing Ethics27(1), 258-272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733019832941

Rainer, J., Schneider, J. K., & Lorenz, R. A. (2018). Ethical dilemmas in nursing: An integrative review. Journal of Clinical Nursing27(19-20), 3446-3461. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14542

Van der Linden, S., Maibach, E., Cook, J., Leiserowitz, A., Ranney, M., Lewandowsky, S., Árvai, J., & Weber, E. U. (2017). Culture versus cognition is a false dilemma. Nature Climate Change7(7), 457-457. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3323

When a pregnant lady is brain dead, she cannot acknowledge the fetus. Therefore, the mother lacks the moral responsibility to keep the fetus alive (Akhyari, Lichtenberg & Boeken, 2019; Paternoster et al., 2017; Staff & Nash, 2017). Being uninsured and lacking an advance directive that states that the mother intends to be kept alive to save the unborn child, prolonging life is considered unethical. In the case of a 26-year-old woman who is 20 weeks pregnant, ethical and legal considerations are vital.

The Hendricks/Smith Model posits that one needs to undertake various processes before making a decision. The very first undertaking would be to gather data or conduct an assessment on the patient (Fero, Herrick, 7 Hu, 2011). There are several relevant data concerning the patient such as lack of insurance, the position of the mother, the position of the fetus and the status of the mother. The case reveals that the patient is brain dead. Secondly, the model stipulates that one needs to make a diagnosis of the patient, in which case the patient is brain dead. Third, planning for the various outcomes need to occur. In the present case, there are two options: supporting the mother’s position which is to keep the lady alive until a Cesarean delivery is conducted or supporting the husband who wants it to be terminated in order for his wife to be relieved. Following the planning process, Hendricks/Smith model states that the case manager must now make a decision. According to Nishimura et al. (2016), the older the baby when its mother is confirmed brain-dead, the higher its chances of survival. In the present case, and given the information about the husband’s lack of support for the pregnancy, it would be prudent for the case manager to prioritize the life of the fetus by supporting the mother’s position. Therefore, the mother will be kept on the life support machine until such a time that the Cesarean delivery option will be implemented. Thereafter, the state of the woman will be evaluated to determine if she will continue using the life support or she will be terminated.

I agree with the analysis of my peers because based on the Herrick/Smith model, a baby born at 20 weeks will have a 20 to 30 percent survival chances and a 40 percent chance of seriously being disabled (Pikto-Pietkiewicz et al., 2019). The older the baby, the less the risk of severe disability. In the scenario, the best ethical outcome would be to maintain the pregnancy until such as time that a Cesarean is conducted. The absence of an advance directive from the pregnant woman makes this the best ethical decision. Adopting the African-American culture for the scenario does not alter the chosen option. In the African-American population, terminating the woman’s life would be tantamount to killing, which is not supported by the culture.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: on NURS 8000 Discussion: EthicsNURS 8000 Discussion Ethics

References

Akhyari, P., Lichtenberg, A., & Boeken, U. (2019). Successful transplantation of a heart donated 5 months after brain death of a pregnant young woman. The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 38(10), 1121.

Fero, L. J., Herrick, C. A., & Hu, J. (2011). Introduction to care coordination and nursing management. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Nishimura, T., Kohama, K., Osako, T., Yamada, T., Tanaka, H., Nakao, A., & Kotani, J. (2016). Case of 24-week fetus delivered from mother on life support with brain-death from suicide attempt: Ethical issues associated with severe complications. Acta Medica Okayama, 70(5), 389-392.

Paternoster, M., Saccone, G., Maruotti, G. M., Bianco, C., Casella, C., Buccelli, C., & Martinelli, P. (2017). Ethical challenges in pregnant women with brain injury. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine.

Pikto-Pietkiewicz, I., Okniński, A., Wójtowicz, R., & Wójtowicz, M. (2019). The Management of a Thirteen Weeks Pregnant Woman Rendered Brain-Dead Following a Ruptured Aneurysm. The Journal of Critical Care Medicine, 5(3), 111.

Staff, L., & Nash, M. (2017). Brain death during pregnancy and prolonged corporeal support of the body: A critical discussion. Women and Birth, 30(5), 354-360.

NURS 8000 Discussion: Ethics

Also Read:

NURS 8000 WEEK 2 Discussion 2: AACN Competencies and the Walden Mission, Vision, and Outcomes

NURS 8000 Discussion 1: Learning Online Week 2

To prepare:

  • Reflect on ethical challenges that you have encountered in your nursing practice.
  • Think about the information the experts shared in this week’s media presentation, focusing on the ethical challenges they have encountered as nurse leaders or scientists, as well as information presented in other Learning Resources.
  • With this information in mind, consider what new ethical challenges you may face once you obtain your doctoral degree.

By Day 3 of NURS 8000 Discussion: Ethics

Post a cohesive response that addresses the following:

  • Describe two or more significant ethical issues relevant to the DNP- or PhD-prepared nurse.
  • Explain how these issues might compare to the types of issues you have already encountered in your practice.

Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.

By Day 6 of NURS 8000 Discussion: Ethics

Respond to at least two of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

  • Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence, or research.
  • Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
  • Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Walden Library.
  • Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
  • Make a suggestion based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
  • Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.

Submission and Grading Information

Week 5: Ethical Issues Relevant to the Doctorally Prepared Nurse

Nurses encounter ethical issues every day in their practice. The high degree of public confidence only reinforces their responsibility to adhere to established ethical standards. As a DNP- or PhD-prepared nurse, it is especially important to be aware of the multitude of ethical issues that can affect nursing practice and research.

This week, you review ethical codes and standards for nursing practitioners and scholars, and you explore ethical challenges you may encounter in your chosen profession.

Learning Objectives

Students will:
  • Analyze key ethical issues relevant to the doctorally prepared nurse
  • Summarize required components of doctoral projects at Walden University

Learning Resources

Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

NURS 8000 Discussion: Ethics Houser, J. (2018). Nursing research: Reading, using, and creating evidence (4th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett.

[For PhD students ONLY]

  • Chapter 3, “Ethical and Legal Considerations in Research”This chapter addresses ethical issues related to nursing research.

The author discusses what is meant by health care leaders judiciously and transparently addressing ethical challenges.

[For PhD students ONLY]

[For PhD students ONLY]

[For PhD students ONLY]

Required Media

Laureate Education (Producer). (2011a). Ethical issues relevant to the DNP [Video file]. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 5 minutes.

In this media program, Dr. Joan Stanley discusses the importance of considering multiple perspectives when approaching ethical issues as part of a health care team. Dr. Linda Beechinor and Dr. Susan Stefan share ethical challenges they face as nurse leaders.

Optional Resources

Fairchild, R. M. (2010). Practical ethical theory for nurses responding to complexity in care. Nursing Ethics, 17(3), 353–362.

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Grimm, J. (2010). Effective leadership: Making the difference. JEN: Journal of Emergency Nursing, 36(1), 74–77.

Note: You will access this article from the Walden Library databases.

Name: NURS_8000_Week5_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent Good Fair Poor
RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION

Discussion post minimum requirements:

*The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct.

Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*.
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course.
Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course.
CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION
Points Range: 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature.
Points Range: 7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature
Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas
QUALITY OF WRITING
Points Range: 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Points Range: 5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;.
Points Range: 4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Points Range: 0 (0%) – 3 (10%)
Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints.
Total Points: 30