Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.
GET A 40% DISCOUNT ON YOU FIRST ORDER
Consider the proposal below in relation to the following case:
It is proposed that Counties Manukau District Health Board accepts funding from Ronald McDonald House Charities NZ for accommodation and associated services at Middlemore Hospital.
Choose one of the following ethical theories:
Use your chosen theory to present arguments both for and against the case proposal. Provide a clear conclusion for whether, on balance, your overall ethical argument for or against the proposal is more convincing.
Using links to your case analysis in Q1 and suitable academic literature, critically evaluate the limitations of your chosen theory.
Recommended resource lists by uni
Duncan, P. (2010). Values, ethics and health care. London: Sage.
Rachels, J. & Rachels, S. (2006). The Elements of Moral Philosophy, (6th ed.). New York, McGraw- Hill.
Seedhouse, D. (2005). Values Based Decision Making for the Caring Professions. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Journal of Bioethical Enquiry
Journal of Medical Ethics
The Hastings Centre Report
Health and Disability Commissioner: www.hdc.org.nz
Human Rights Commission: www.hrc.co.nz
Ministry of Health: www.moh.govt.nz
The Privacy Commissioner: www.privacy.org.nz
Students are expected to read widely in order to inform their learning and assessments. They should utilise not only the references above, but also a range of ethics texts and journals from the library and online.
|A range||B range||C range||D range|
|Justify ethical decisions based on theoretical frameworks and sound reasoning processes.
||Excellent application of relevant theoretical framework to chosen case study.
Clear ability to develop clear, coherent arguments with opportunities maximised to present well-reasoned, justified, and convincing conclusions.
Excellent understanding of ethical process. Effective use of relevant sources to achieve depth and rigor of understanding.
In depth awareness of complex, conflicting perspectives.
|Good application of relevant theoretical framework to chosen case study.
Ability to develop clear, coherent arguments with well-reasoned, justified, convincing conclusions.
Good understanding of ethical process. Relevant sources used appropriately in support.
Good exploration of identified competing or conflicting ethical perspectives.
|Adequate application of relevant theoretical framework to chosen case study.
Some arguments unclear or underdeveloped.
Adequate understanding of ethical process and decision making.
Appropriate use of relevant sources to support theoretical understanding.
Adequate identification of competing or conflicting ethical perspectives.
|Inadequate understanding of theoretical framework.
Does not reach an ethical decision. Inadequate understanding of ethical process and decision making.
Inappropriate use or lack of relevant sources to support theoretical understanding.
Inadequate awareness of alternative perspectives.
|Critically evaluate different ethical approaches in health care, supported by scholarly analysis.
||Excellent critical evaluation of chosen ethical approach. Provision of balanced arguments underpinned by effective integration of highly relevant scholarly literature.
Critical analysis effectively supported with insightful links to chosen case study.
|Good critical evaluation of chosen ethical approach. Arguments supported by appropriate integration of relevant scholarly literature. Critical analysis includes some effective links to relevant examples within chosen case.
||Adequate evaluation of ethical approach. Appropriate use of scholarly literature to support own perspective.
Critical analysis makes some links to chosen case study.
|Does not critically evaluate ethical approaches.
Critique unsupported by relevant literature.
No clear links to chosen case study.
|Present work at the appropriate academic standard.
||All instructions followed.
Well-structured and coherent.
Accurate use of language with little grammatical or spelling errors. Comprehensive understanding of specialist terms evident.
All sources acknowledged and referencing consistently accurate.
All sources are relevant with evidence of breadth and depth. Where academic, all sources used are reviewed or refereed.
Extensive range of sources.