PHD Writers US

 Bioethics And Medical Professional Code Of Ethics

We write papers for students

Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper.

Get Help Now!

 Bioethics And Medical Professional Code Of Ethics

Order ID	53563633773
Type	Essay
Writer Level	Masters
Style	APA
Sources/References	4
Perfect Number of Pages to Order	5-10 Pages

Description/Paper Instructions

Bioethics And Medical Professional Code Of Ethics

1. Describe the Nuremberg Code. Provide a brief summary of it and include the history of the code. How does the Nuremberg Code compare to the other medical professional code of ethics?
2. Bioethics are a relatively new, yet evolving field. Select and describe one bioethical issue that is addressed in this unit. Explain why it falls in the category of bioethics. What are some of the arguments for and against your topic? Explain why there might be any controversy regarding it. Provide examples to support your conclusions.
3. Explain and discuss gene therapy. What is it, and how does it work? Provide solid examples to explain its application. What are the potential benefits and risks? Again, provide examples to demonstrate this.
4. We discussed the ethical dilemmas around human stem cell research. Do you agree with this type of scientific research? Does it matter that this type of medical research holds promise to treat and even cure spinal cord injuries? What do you think? Discuss your own personal views related to stem cell research and use factual evidence to defend your position.
5. Explain the rationale and application of SPACE evaluation in health care planning. How would you utilize SPACE in planning for your own health care facility or program?
6. Discuss the hierarchy of strategic decisions and alternatives that are required for effective strategic planning in health care organizations.
7. Describe the essential services provided within the scope of public health in America today. What is meant by Public Health Assessment Services? Discuss at least three examples of Public Health Assessment Services that are taking place in your own area.

Case Study

For the Case Study, you will review and respond to the below case.

You can access the case by visiting the following website:

The Center for Practical Bioethics. (n.d.). Case studies. Retrieved from http://practicalbioethics.org/resources/case-studies

• From this page, please locate and read the case study: A Sister For Joshua

Using the questions at the end of the case study as guide, describe the ethical dilemma faced by the participants. As you explain the ethical issues, provide possible resolutions and your opinion on the scenario. Make sure you apply the ethical decision-making principles, processes, or theories discussed in this course so far.

You are not to just answer the questions presented, but use those questions to walk through the ethical dilemma and present your analysis and conclusion.

The response should be at least two pages in length. You are required to use at least your textbook as source material for your response. All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced; paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations.

Book being used for Question 1-4 and Case Study is Fremgen, B. F. (2016). Medical law and ethics (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Response for questions should be at least 200 words in length.

Book being used for question 5-7 is Ginter, P. M., Duncan, W. J., & Swayne, L. E. (2013). Strategic management of health care organizations (7th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Response for question 5 and 6 should be at least 200 words in length. Question 7 should be at least 500 words.

1.

Describe the Nuremberg Code. Provide a brief summary of it

and

include the history of the code.

How does the Nuremberg Code compare to the other medical professional code of ethics?

2.

Bioethics are a relatively new, yet evolving field. Select and describe one bioethical issue that is

addressed in this unit. Explain wh

y it falls in the category of bioethics. What are some of the

arguments for and against your topic? Explain why there might be any controversy regarding it.

Provide examples to support your conclusions.

3.

Explain and discuss gene therapy. What is it, and ho

w does it work? Provide solid examples to

explain its application. What are the potential benefits and risks? Again, provide examples to

demonstrate this.

4.

We discussed the ethical dilemmas around human stem cell research. Do you agree with this

type of sc

ientific research? Does it matter that this type of medical research holds promise to treat

and even cure spinal cord injuries? What do you think? Discuss your own personal views related

to stem cell research and use factual evidence to defend your positio

n.

5.

Explain the rationale and application of SPACE evaluation in health care planning. How would

you utilize SPACE in planning for your own health care facility or program?

6.

Discuss the hierarchy of strategic decisions and alternatives that are required fo

r effective

strategic planning in health care organizations.

7.

Describe the essential services provided within the scope of public health in America today. What

is meant by Public Health Assessment Services? Discuss at least three examples of Public

Health

Assessment Services that are taking place in your own area.

Case Study

For the Case Study, you will review and respond to the below case.

You can access the case by visiting the following website:

The Center for Practical Bioethics. (n.d.). Case studies.

Retrieved from

http://practicalbioethics.org/resources/case

–

studies

From this page, please locate and read the case study:

A Sister For Joshua

Using the questions at the end of the

case study as guide, describe the ethical dilemma faced by the

participants. As you explain the ethical issues, provide possible resolutions and your opinion on the

scenario. Make sure you apply the ethical decision

–

making principles, processes, or theorie

s

discussed in this course so far.

You are not to just answer the questions presented, but use those questions to walk through the

ethical dilemma and present your analysis and conclusion.

The

response should be at least

two

page

s

in length. You are requir

ed to use at least your textbook

as source material for your response. All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced;

paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations.

Book being used for Question 1

–

4

and

Case Study

is Fremg

en, B. F. (2016).

Medical law and ethics

(5th

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Response for question

s

should be at least

2

00 words in length.

Book being used for question

5

–

7

is Ginter, P. M., Duncan, W. J., & Swayne, L. E. (2013).

Strategic

management of health care organizations

(7th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey

–

Bass.

Response

for

question

5 and 6

should be at least

2

00 words in length.

Q

uestion

7

should be at least

5

00

words.

1. Describe the Nuremberg Code. Provide a brief summary of it and include the history of the code.

How does the Nuremberg Code compare to the other medical professional code of ethics?

2. Bioethics are a relatively new, yet evolving field. Select and describe one bioethical issue that is

addressed in this unit. Explain why it falls in the category of bioethics. What are some of the

arguments for and against your topic? Explain why there might be any controversy regarding it.

Provide examples to support your conclusions.

3. Explain and discuss gene therapy. What is it, and how does it work? Provide solid examples to

explain its application. What are the potential benefits and risks? Again, provide examples to

demonstrate this.

4. We discussed the ethical dilemmas around human stem cell research. Do you agree with this

type of scientific research? Does it matter that this type of medical research holds promise to treat

and even cure spinal cord injuries? What do you think? Discuss your own personal views related

to stem cell research and use factual evidence to defend your position.

5. Explain the rationale and application of SPACE evaluation in health care planning. How would

you utilize SPACE in planning for your own health care facility or program?

6. Discuss the hierarchy of strategic decisions and alternatives that are required for effective

strategic planning in health care organizations.

7. Describe the essential services provided within the scope of public health in America today. What

is meant by Public Health Assessment Services? Discuss at least three examples of Public

Health Assessment Services that are taking place in your own area.

Case Study

For the Case Study, you will review and respond to the below case.

You can access the case by visiting the following website:

The Center for Practical Bioethics. (n.d.). Case studies. Retrieved from

http://practicalbioethics.org/resources/case-studies

• From this page, please locate and read the case study: A Sister For Joshua

Using the questions at the end of the case study as guide, describe the ethical dilemma faced by the

participants. As you explain the ethical issues, provide possible resolutions and your opinion on the

scenario. Make sure you apply the ethical decision-making principles, processes, or theories

discussed in this course so far.

You are not to just answer the questions presented, but use those questions to walk through the

ethical dilemma and present your analysis and conclusion.

The response should be at least two pages in length. You are required to use at least your textbook

as source material for your response. All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced;

paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations.

Book being used for Question 1-4 and Case Study is Fremgen, B. F. (2016). Medical law and ethics (5th

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Response for questions should be at least 200 words in length.

Book being used for question 5-7 is Ginter, P. M., Duncan, W. J., & Swayne, L. E. (2013). Strategic

management of health care organizations (7th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Response for

question 5 and 6 should be at least 200 words in length. Question 7 should be at least 500 words.

199Research Paper Grading Rubric

Criteria	Levels of Achievement
Content 70%	Advanced 90-100%	Proficient 70-89%	Developing 1-69%	Not present
Introduction and conclusion	8 to 10 points The introduction accurately outlines the project’s primary objectives and justifies necessity for a solution. The conclusion explains the outcomes and solutions with excellence. More than 2 scholarly sources and 400 words combined.	6 to 7 points The introduction accurately outlines most of the project’s primary objectives and justifies necessity for a solution and/or the conclusion explains the outcomes and solutions. Minimum of 2 scholarly sources and 400 words combined.	1 to 5 points The introduction accurately outlines some of the project’s primary objectives and/or inadequately justifies necessity for a solution and/or the conclusion fails to explain the outcomes and solutions and/or does not meet the minimum of 2 scholarly sources and 400 words combined.	0 points Substantially unmet or not present
Plan and Report	41 to 50 points Report details all objectives required in the instructions with excellent logic, organization, and supporting references. Report indicates mastery of the subject matter and exceeds the textbook examples in quality and detail. Over 2,500 words and 5 unique scholarly journal articles or respected whitepapers relevant to the solution.	37 to 40 points Report details all objectives required in the instructions with adequate logic, organization, and supporting references and/or report indicates comprehension of the subject matter and meets the textbook examples in quality and detail and/or a minimum of 2,500 words and 5 unique scholarly journal articles or respected whitepapers relevant to the solution.	1 to 36 points Report is missing objectives required in the instructions with adequate logic, organization, and supporting references and/or report indicates some misunderstanding of the subject matter and/or does not meet the textbook examples in quality and detail and/or a minimum of 2,500 words and 5 unique scholarly journal articles or respected whitepapers relevant to the solution.	0 points Substantially unmet or not present
Project Solution	20 to 27 points Presents optimal solution and sound methodology in support of solution.	17 to 19 points Presents solution and methodology in support of solution.	1 to 16 points Presents partial solution and/or partial methodology in support of solution.	0 points Substantially unmet or not present
Structure 30%	Advanced 90-100%	Proficient 70-89%	Developing 1-69%	Not present
APA, Grammar, and Spelling	18 to 20 points Properly formatted APA paper with table of contents and references pages. Correct spelling and grammar used. Contains fewer than 2 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or minimal errors (1-2) noted in the interpretation or execution of proper APA format. Excellent organization, headings, and flow of the main concepts exist.	15 to 17 points Paper contains fewer than 5 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or some errors (3-7) noted in the interpretation or execution of proper APA format and/or inadequate organization, headings, and flow of the main concepts exist and/or notable absences in required APA formatting elements such as: Title page, running head, font type and size (Times New Roman 12 point), and line spacing.	1 to 14 points Paper contains fewer than 10 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or numerous errors (7+) noted in the interpretation or execution of proper APA format and/or inadequate organization, headings, and flow of the main concepts exist and/or notable absences in required APA formatting elements such as: Title page, running head, font type and size (Times New Roman 12 point), and line spacing.	0 points Paper contains more than 10 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content and/or numerous errors (10+) noted in the interpretation or execution of proper APA format and/or inadequate organization, headings, and flow of the main concepts exist.
Overall Requirements	16 to 18 points Over 2,500 words more than 5 unique scholarly peer reviewed journal articles from well-respected IT journals that directly relate to and sufficiently support the research	13 to 15 points Minimum of 2,500 words and 5 unique scholarly peer reviewed journal articles from well-respected IT journals exist that relate to and sufficiently support the research	1 to 12 points Less than 2,500 words and less than 5 unique scholarly peer reviewed journal articles from well-respected IT journals that relate to and sufficiently support the research	0 points Substantially unmet or not present
Total Points

RUBRIC QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points:  Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50:  The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50:  The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately.  Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50:  The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples.  The answer is complete. 50 points:  The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples.  No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points:  Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points:  Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points:  References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated.  Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points:  Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented.  APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors.  There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points:  Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented.  APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points:  Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20:  The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors  10 points out 20:  The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20:  The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points:  The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points:  Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements.  The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.

GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER

CLICK ON THE LINK HERE:  https://phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow

Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!

The Post  Bioethics And Medical Professional Code Of Ethics first appeared on PHD Writers US and is written by admin