24/7 online - support@tutoringspots.com
1-316-444-1378 or 44-141-628-6690
Login
August 8th, 2017 
admin Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 (Thursday) and you have until Day 7 (Monday) to respond to your classmates. Your grade will reflect both the quality of your initial post and the depth of your responses. Patient RightsYour instructor will assign you one of the following options by Day 1 of Week Two. In your initial discussion post, address the questions associated with your assigned option. Include the option number in the subject/title line of your post. You must use at least two scholarly sources in your post. Respond to at least two classmates using the required response prompt for their option (e.g., if your initial post was Option 1, then respond to posts from Option 2 and 3 or if your initial post was Option 2, then respond to posts from Option 1 and 3). Your initial post should be at least 250 words; your response post should be at least 100 words. Option 1: Patient Rights-EuthanasiaFor this option, you will take a look at the ethics surrounding euthanasia (intentionally ending a life to relieve pain or suffering) and the right to live versus right to die arguments that were present within the Teri Schiavo and Karen Ann Quinlan cases. To being, view the Craig Ewart at Dignitas (Switzerland), The Terri Schiavo Story , and the Euthanasia-Whose life is it, anyway? videos. Then, research and discuss the topic of euthanasia. For your initial post, pick one case (either Teri Schiavo or Karen Ann Quinlan) and one side of the argument (either right to live or right to die) and explain how you would have handled this particular case differently in order to protect the patient. Your initial post must be a minimum of 250 words. Option 1 Required Response: Regardless of your personal beliefs, respond to your classmates post by considering the opposite side of their argument. Explain what the other sides logic was in relation to the same case your classmate chose (e.g., if your classmate selected right to live, give the rationale behind the right to die argument for that case). Each response must be a minimum of 100 words. Option 2: Patient Rights-Assisted SuicideReview the Dr. Jack Kevorkians 60 Minutes Interview video. Research and discuss physician assisted suicide. Pick a side on this argument and explain why you selected that particular side using scholarly research to support your decision. Explain how this view would address the case of Dr. Kevorkian? In your post, explain whether you believe Dr. Kevorkian was a hero or a murderer? (Remember, there is no correct answer to this questionbut support your opinion with research and facts). Your initial response should be at least 250 words. Option 2 Required Response: Regardless of your personal beliefs, respond to your classmates post by considering the opposite side of their argument. Explain how this approach would affect the outcome for Dr. Kevorkian. For example, if your classmate responded that Dr. Kevorkian was a hero, respond to their post by explaining the reasoning behind the view that he was a murderer and what that would mean for him. What are the ethical principles behind this point of view? Your response must contain at least 100 words. Option 3: Patient Rights and PrivacyReview the Electronic Health Records: Privacy and Security video (transcript). Research and discuss electronic health records (EHR). Explain how EHR are intended to protect the patient. Discuss any barriers that may prevent necessary protections. Your initial response should be at least 250 words. Option 3 Required Response: Respond to your classmates post and explain the concept that EHR might not be able to fully protect the patient. In what ways could this be better or worse than paper records? Then, refer to the barriers mentioned by your classmate and describe the potential policies that could reduce those barriers. Your response must contain at least 100 words. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your post and responses. Respond This section lists options that can be used to view responses. Expand All Print View Show Options ResponsesResponses are listed below in the following order: response, author and the date and time the response is posted. Sort by Read/Unread Sort by Response Sorted Ascending, click to sort descending Sort by Author Sort by Date/Time*No one has responded to this topic. To be the first respondent, click the Respond link below the topic. Ashford 3: Week 2 Discussion 2 Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 (Thursday) and you have until Day 7 (Monday) to respond to your classmates. Your grade will reflect both the quality of your initial post and the depth of your responses. Courtroom Drama Your instructor will select one of the following court cases to dramatize in this weeks discussion board. Your instructor will select (or ask for volunteers) one student to be the plaintiff and one student to be the defendant from the case. The remaining class members will become the jury. The plaintiff and defendant are exempt from response post requirements for this forum. They only need to build a strong case in their favor via their initial video post. Each participant: the plaintiff, defendant, and jury members, will create their initial post using a YouTube video to explain their case and/or reasoning. Review the YouTube Webcam Quick-Start Guide for instructions on how to create a YouTube account and YouTube video post using your computers webcam. Plaintiff (the person or entity who is suing another): Research the case and present evidence as to how you were wronged in the scenario. You must use scholarly sources to support your case and include the legal and ethical violations that occurred. You will support your suit by arguing your case in a 5-minute video to the jury. Post the link to your video in the discussion forum along with your reference list by the end of Day 3. Defendant (the person or entity who is being sued by the Plaintiff): Research the case and present evidence as to how you did not act against legal and ethical standards. You must use scholarly sources to support your case and why the issue is not a violation. You will support your suit by arguing your case in a 5-minute video to the jury. Post the link to your video in the discussion forum along with your reference list by the end of Day 3. Jurors (the remainder of the class): Research the case, as well as the legal and ethical standards surrounding the issues from both sides. View the videos from both the plaintiff and defendant and in your video post, argue for your decision; to rule either in favor of the Plaintiff or Defendant. You will present your decision in a 5-minute video explaining the rationale behind your decision. Post the link to your video in the discussion forum along with your reference list by Day 5. The Jurors posts are due by Day 5 (Saturday), after viewing the Plaintiffs and Defendants posts from Day 3 (e.g., the Plaintiff and Defendant must post by Day 3 so that the Jurors have time to respond by Day 5). Juror Response Posts: By the end of Day 7, review the decisions by your fellow jurors. Respond to two jurors one who ruled in favor of the Plaintiff and one who ruled in favor of the Defendant (e.g., if you ruled in favor of the Plaintiff, you must respond to one juror who ruled in favor of the Defendant and one who ruled in favor of the Plaintiff). Discuss your agreement or disagreement with their decision and present additional facts to support your argument. Your responses must be a minimum of 100 words. The students who portrayed the Plaintiff and the Defendant are exempt from response posts. Judge: Your instructor will serve as the judge and review all posts, and then present the final decision as decided by the majority of the jurors ruling. This ruling will be posted by Day 1 of Week Three. Comments regarding the final ruling are encouraged, and may be made within the discussion forum beyond the close of Week Two. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your post and responses. Respond This section lists options that can be used to view responses. Expand All Print View Show Options ResponsesResponses are listed below in the following order: response, author and the date and time the response is posted. Sort by Read/Unread Sort by Response Sorted Ascending, click to sort descending Sort by Author Sort by Date/Time*No one has responded to this topic. To be the first respondent, click the Respond link below the topic. Ashford 3: Week 2 Assignment Genetic Information Review the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA). Then, review the following Nondiscrimination Act Case Studies. Determine whether the information presented within it could be considered a violation or a non-violation of the GINA of 2008. Include the following in your paper: Write a synopsis of the cases discussed in this document.Analyze the cases under study in this document by addressing this question: Should the court have invalidated civil rights as it did or did the court make a poor decision? Explain your answer.Determine whether the appropriateness of this decision is based upon the purpose of GINA. Your paper must be two to three pages in length, excluding the title and reference pages, and include at least two scholarly sources, not including the course text. Your paper and all sources must be formatted and/or cited according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. For additional information, please refer to:The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA). (2009). Fact Sheet. Retrieved from http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/newsroom/fsGINA.html Ashford 4: Week 3 Discussion 1 Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 (Thursday) and you have until Day 7 (Monday) to respond to your classmates. Your grade will reflect both the quality of your initial post and the depth of your responses. Patient Safety ActRead the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005. Then, review the information on the Core Measure Sets from The Joint Commission. Pick one of the core measures from the list at the bottom of this webpage and discuss how a hospital would typically put policies and procedures into place in order to ensure that it is following your selected core measure. Utilize at least two scholarly sources, not including the textbook, that contain research regarding how your policy and/or procedure would be put into place in a hospital setting. Your initial post must be a minimum of 250 words. Required Response: Review your classmates posts and select three who chose different core measures than you. In a substantial post to each, evaluate the feasibility of putting together their recommended policy and/or procedure for a health care facility. Explain whether or not you think there is a better way to ensure that this core measure is followed. You must use at least one additional scholarly source in your response. Your response posts must be a minimum of 100 words. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your post and responses. Respond This section lists options that can be used to view responses. Expand All Print View Show Options ResponsesResponses are listed below in the following order: response, author and the date and time the response is posted. Sort by Read/Unread Sort by Response Sorted Ascending, click to sort descending Sort by Author Sort by Date/Time*No one has responded to this topic. To be the first respondent, click the Respond link below the topic. Ashford 4: Week 3 Discussion 2 Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 (Thursday) and you have until Day 7 (Monday) to respond to your classmates. Your grade will reflect both the quality of your initial post and the depth of your responses. Hot Coffee Watch the series of videos related to the documentary movie Hot Coffee and/or watch the full-length feature film if you are able to procure it. Each of the video clips are approximately five minutes in length. Your initial post must be a minimum of 250 words and utilize at least two scholarly sources, not including the course text. Address the following as you respond: Explain whether you believe that our justice system promotes frivolous law suits or protects against them.Analyze the various elements that people should take into consideration prior to filing a lawsuit that might be perceived as frivolous.Explain the ethical considerations surrounding such lawsuits in the health care arena. Required Response: Respond to at least two classmates. Examine their explanation of our justice system in relation to promoting or protecting against frivolous lawsuits. Discuss whether or not their explanation can apply to medical malpractice. Your responses should contain at least 100 words. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your post and responses. Respond This section lists options that can be used to view responses. Expand All Print View Show Options ResponsesResponses are listed below in the following order: response, author and the date and time the response is posted. Sort by Read/Unread Sort by Response Sorted Ascending, click to sort descending Sort by Author Sort by Date/Time*No one has responded to this topic. To be the first respondent, click the Respond link below the topic. Ashford 4: Week 3 Assignment Annotated Bibliography Under the Final Paper tab in this classroom, determine which case you will be researching for your Final Paper. Provide a description of the case you will be researching. Then, find at least six scholarly sources that are connected with the ethical dilemma and/or case-related content that you will be using to complete your Final Paper. Provide an annotated bibliography of these six (or more) sources. APA formatted citationA description of the article:What does it address?What were the outcomes or conclusions?How does this apply to your case study analysis?Does it provide insights into an ethical concept?Is it a similar case to the one you are analyzing?Does it offer suggestions from best practices in ethical decision making?Your paper should be at least two pages in length, excluding title and reference pages, and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Visit the Ashford Writing Center and view this Sample Annotated Bibliography for an example of correct annotated bibliography form. Ashford 5: Week 4 Discussion 1 Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 (Thursday) and you have until Day 7 (Monday) to respond to your classmates. Your grade will reflect both the quality of your initial post and the depth of your responses. Ethical Resource Allocation Work through the simulation titled Resource Allocation from the end of Chapter 8 of your course text. Review the various options in the simulation, then select Your Own Option to type out your own solution to the scenario. You will need to copy and paste your response from Your Own Option into the discussion board forum as it will not be transferred otherwise. Here is a brief synopsis of the simulation regarding the hospitals budget and dilemma: Hospital costs in millions for one year: One 35-year-old cancer patient who needs significant time with the doctor, medical supplies, tests, and around the clock care. Cost: 100Emergency Room operations for daily care and treatment of about 100 people (~365,000/year). Cost: 1002 Senior Patients who need hip replacement surgery. Cost: 5010 patients (ranging in age from 18 to 45) receiving assistance in your inpatient drug/alcohol rehab unit. Cost:100An MRI unit that is on the fritz and could die any day. Replacement Cost: 170One of your two X-ray machines is inoperable and must be replaced. Cost 100Ambulance drive-in area was damaged and needs to be repaired. Cost: 25Training needs for nursing staff for certification requirements. Cost: 55 TOTAL: $700 million For this discussion, address the following: You have $700 million in expenses and only $500 million to work with. How do allocate your resources?Who gets treated and who has to wait?What about your facilities?Determine what you plan to do and explain your reasoning as well as the ethical considerations behind your decision. Your initial response must be at least 250 words and must use at least two scholarly sources. Required Response: Review your classmates resource allocation plan and justification. Analyze the ethical concerns you have that may negatively impact the hospital. Describe the potential backlash that may result from their plan. Respond to at least two classmates. Your response must be at least 100 words. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your post and responses. Respond This section lists options that can be used to view responses. Expand All Print View Show Options ResponsesResponses are listed below in the following order: response, author and the date and time the response is posted. Sort by Read/Unread Sort by Response Sorted Ascending, click to sort descending Sort by Author Sort by Date/Time*No one has responded to this topic. To be the first respondent, click the Respond link below the topic. Ashford 5: Week 4 Assignment Stark Law Two physicians, Dr. S. and Dr. V., leased a nuclear camera so they would no longer have to refer their patients to the local hospital for nuclear imaging. Faced with the prospect of losing over a third of its $2,274,094 in annual gross nuclear medicine revenues, the hospital responded by threatening to revoke the doctors admitting privileges. Lengthy negotiations ensued, at the end of which the hospital agreed to sublease the camera from the two physicians; the camera remained at the physicians offices but other physicians with privileges at the hospital could use it. Four other local physicians who provided the same or similar services to patients as Dr. S. and Dr. V. brought a qui tam action alleging that the sublease violated the Anti-Kickback and Stark Acts and that the defendants falsely certified compliance with those laws in connection with claims submitted to Medicare in violation of the False Claims Act. (Please note: This is an actual court case and an Internet search may uncover the actual case details. You are prohibited from utilizing any source materials associated with this case. Use of any related materials will result in a reduction of points on this assignment. This assignment is being graded on your ability to critically thinkon your own recognizancebased on your comprehension of the knowledge provided in this weeks learning materials.) Instructions: Carefully review Chapter 7 of your textbook and research Stark Law. Given this scenario, analyze whether the actions of Dr. S. and Dr. V. violated Stark Law. Provide solid evidence supporting your decision by utilizing information from the Ashford University Library as well as the law itself. Your paper must be two to three pages in length, excluding the title and reference pages; include at least two scholarly sources, in addition to the textbook; and be written in APA format. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment. Ashford 6: Week 5 Discussion 1 Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 (Thursday) and you have until Day 7 (Monday) to respond to your classmates. Your grade will reflect both the quality of your initial post and the depth of your responses. Compliance Presentation Imagine that you are a hospitals compliance officer, and you are charged with making a presentation to your hospitals board of directors regarding the moral right to healthcare. Your presentation should include at least three of the elements learned throughout this course, which could include, but are not limited to: the Code of Ethics, resource allocation, Stark Law, medical malpractice, and cultural competency. For this discussion, begin by creating a PowerPoint presentation that addresses the issue of the moral right to healthcare. Then, utilize the PowerPoint and create a presentation using a screencast program. Your presentation must include at least five slides (not including a cover slide and reference slide), utilize at least two scholarly sources, and be between 3 and 5 minutes long. Please post your references either on your last slide or within the discussion post. Please also post your link to your screencast as well as your actual PowerPoint presentation in the discussion forum. Required Response I (Due by Day 5): Imagine that you are one of the board members listening to your compliance officers presentation. Respond with a minimum of 150 words to at least two colleagues cases in an appropriate matter by addressing the following: Give your overall impression of the presentation. Was it clear and understandable?Examine at least three key points that were made in the presentation. Did these elements make sense? Could they be accepted by the hospital?Challenge your colleague regarding his or her presentation by questioning one or more of the key points in the presentation. Your question should not be able to be answered with a yes or no. Use phrases such as, How can we What do you think the response would be to and similar notations. Required Response II (Due by Day 7): Your classmates will have posted questions to your original post. You are required to respond to their question in a scholarly manner. Use your research to support your response to the comments and question(s) they posed. Your response should be at least 100 words. You may use Screenr, Jing, Screencast-O-Matic, or any other screencast program, however the use of a screencast program is required. Using Screenr.com Review the Screenr Quick-Start Guide and visit the Screenr.com website to get started. You may view the Screenr demonstration video or contact Screenr Help directly for assistance using the software program. If you find using Screenr to be difficult, you may elect to use a different screencast program. Jing and Screencast-O-Matic are other good screencast resources that are free. You may also search on your own to locate a program of your choice. The use of a screencast program is required. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your post and responses. Respond This section lists options that can be used to view responses. Expand All Print View Show Options ResponsesResponses are listed below in the following order: response, author and the date and time the response is posted. Sort by Read/Unread Sort by Response Sorted Ascending, click to sort descending Sort by Author Sort by Date/Time*No one has responded to this topic. To be the first respondent, click the Respond link below the topic. Ashford 6: Week 5 Final Paper Final Paper Review the three scenarios below. Choose one of them and address the questions asked within your selected scenario in the form of a written analysis. Scenario No. 1: HIPAA Privacy RuleCase Study: Imagine that you are the privacy officer for a small town hospital. You receive a report that there is a breach of privacy. You are informed that a 15-year-old girl is received at the emergency with an emergency labor. The baby is delivered in the emergency room as there is no time to move the patient to the obstetrics (OB) department. In addition to the emergency delivery, the baby is born with multiple medical problems. Once the mother and baby are moved to obstetrics and neonate, care is given to both. The OB nurse who took care of the mother and baby completes her shift, and she goes home to her own daughter to have a talk with her. She sits her daughter down and pleads with the girl to tell her if she ever has any problems, especially when it comes to pregnancy. The nurse tells her daughter the story about the young patient who delivered that evening, and she accidentally mentions the patients name. The patients name is one of those odd names that immediately triggers the nurses daughter to relay that she knows the patient. The mother/nurse, realizing that she made a big mistake by mentioning the patients name, pleads with her daughter not to say anything. Needless to say, word shoots through the four high schools in the town the next day. The nurse returns to work the following evening, and she contacts you to hand in her badge and keys, stating that she knows she made a mistake by breaching the young patients privacy and she knows she is going to be fired. In addition to the breach of the obstetrics nurse, you learn that the patient hid her pregnancy from her family, and to make matters worse, her aunt and mother are both nurses at the hospital. You know both of these nurses on a professional and personal level. Scenario No. 1 HIPAA Privacy Rule Project Assignment:Research the HIPAA Privacy Rule here: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002). Standards for privacy of individually identifiable health information; Final Rule. Federal Register, 67(157), 53182-53273. Retrieved from http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/administrative/privacyrule/privrulepd.pdf. Then, perform additional research regarding the HIPAA Privacy Rule and prepare your Final Paper by analyzing the issues through these questions in regards to the above scenario:Analyze the specific requirements needed to perform this investigation.Identify whether this incident was an actual breach of privacy according to the HIPAA law.Examine the differences and similarities between the hospitals stance and HIPAA as to whether the nurse should be fired from her job.Explain why you would fire or not fire the nurse immediately or whether you would put her on administrative leave awaiting the details of the investigation.Scenario No. 2: DNRProject Assignment: Review your State Governments website and search for its official Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) Form. Along with the form will be information and instructions regarding the form. In addition, research three area hospitals to determine if they provide separate DNR forms. Then, perform additional research regarding DNR and prepare your Final Paper by analyzing the issues through these steps: Analyze the requirements of your State Governments DNR.Identify the requirements of the three hospitals DNRs.Examine the differences and similarities between the states and the three hospitals DNR requirements, and address the following questions:What are they?Which one should you follow?Explain how a DNR is applied if a patient is under hospice care and EMTs are called.Scenario No. 3: Institutional Code of EthicsProject Assignment: Codes of ethics are standards that outline how individuals or groups of people are to act. The healthcare/medical community has its own code of ethics, which is outlined in the American Medical Associations Code of Medical Ethics. Review the following: AMAs Code of Medical Ethics here:American Medical Association. (2013). AMAs code of medical ethics. Retrieved from http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/physician-resources/medical-ethics/code-medical-ethics.page.Three local or regional hospitals codes of ethics.Various scholarly research on healthcare codes of ethics (at least seven additional sources).Then, prepare your Final Paper by analyzing the issues through these steps:Analyze the specific requirements of a code of ethics.Identify three critical elements of the AMAs code that you believe are most important.Examine the differences and similarities between the AMAs Code of Medical Ethics requirements and the code requirements of the three hospitals that you researched.Explain why certain individuals and/or groups (please name these) should follow a hospitals code of ethics. Writing the Final Paper The Final Paper:Must be eight to ten double-spaced pages in length, excluding title and reference pages, and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.Must include a title page with the following:Title of paperStudents nameCourse name and numberInstructors nameDate submittedMust begin with an introductory paragraph that has a succinct thesis statement.Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.Must end with a conclusion that reaffirms your thesis.Must use at least eight scholarly sources (not including the course text) that were published within the last five years, including a minimum of four sources from academic journals found in the Ashford University Library.Must document all sources in APA style, as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.Must include a separate reference page, formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment. Assignment Submission In Ashford courses, there are two different ways to submit assignments for grading. Depending on the system the course utilizes, assignments will either be submitted via the classroom Assignment Basket Assignment Basket Icon or Waypoint Waypoint Icon. Waypoint Waypoint Assignment Submission The assignments in this course will be submitted to Waypoint. Please refer to the instructions below to submit your assignment.Click on the Assignment Submission button above. The Waypoint Student Dashboard will appear.Browse for your assignment.Click Upload.Confirm that your assignment was successfully submitted by viewing the appropriate weeks assignment tab in Waypoint, or clicking on Check Assignment Status within the Meet Your Instructor unit in the left navigation panel.For more detailed instructions, refer to the Waypoint Tutorial.
Posted in Uncategorized 
Free revisions
Free title page
Free Bibliography and Reference Pages
Free Formatting (APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard and Others)