case study ethical analysis

/in /by

you will submit your final case study ethical analysis. In this final submission, you will identify the issue and explain the proper action that should be taken utilizing the tools gained through this course. Also, you will recommend agency policies to put in place to prevent these ethical dilemmas from arising in the first place

This is the Scenario

Joe is a corrections officer in a juvenile detention center and works on a unit housing 15 offenders, many of whom suffer from mental health problems. Joe has worked there for about two months. He feels comfortable with his job and has been accepted by the other staff members. He has not had any significant problems with the juveniles and is generally enjoying his work. It is lunchtime on Monday, and Joe is in the dining room supervising the juveniles as they eat. At one table sit six juveniles, one of whom is a 17-year-old named Brian, whom Joe thinks has a mental disability. Brian is displaying offensive behavior that is so bad that Joe cannot eat his own meal. Brian keeps adding ketchup in vast quantities to every dish, then slurping it from the plate. Brian uses his hands instead of a fork. Brian talks with his mouth full, causing him to spit his food across the table in front of the other juveniles. Joe can see that the other juveniles are repulsed by Brian’s behavior and are getting upset by his actions.

2 Joe is surprised to see his coworker and mentor Darren suddenly get up from where he is seated, go over to Brian, grab him by his shirt, and move him away from the table. Darren takes Brian off to the kitchen and returns with a large mixing bowl. In front of everyone, Darren tells Brian to scrape out what is left of his meal into the large bowl. Darren then takes Brian to the center of the dining room floor, puts the bowl of food on the floor, and tells him to eat. Darren tells Brian that he has disgusting manners, and if he is going to act like an animal while eating, he may as well get down on the floor like a dog and eat from his bowl. Darren tells Brian to stay on the floor and lick his bowl clean, like the animal that he is. The other juveniles are visibly upset at what Darren has done. Joe does not do or say anything to Darren while this is going on, though he is taken aback by his coworker’s actions. Later, Darren explains to Joe and other staff who were present that the reason he acted this way was to shock Brian into understanding that his table manners were inappropriate. Darren thought if he used “tough love” on Brian that he would be less likely to act that way in the future.

using 12-point Times New Roman font and following APA guidelines and needs too be 2 pages

 

Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code “Newclient” for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

The post case study ethical analysis appeared first on The Nursing Hub.

Posc 7: introduction to political theory

/in /by

The ability to analyze and interpret texts is an essential skill in the study of political theory.  The purpose of this assignment is to give you an opportunity to develop that skill by preparing a short, carefully-crafted essay on the similarities and contrasts between Plato and Aristotle on several topics. These papers are to be exegetical or interpretive, which means that the task is not to evaluate the validity of what the authors are saying, but rather to explain what they are saying—and why—in the passages under discussion. In so doing, you will be defending a certain interpretation of the texts at hand. 

This is not meant to be a research paper. You should not consult or cite any sources other than the texts you have been asked to read in this class.  Using any language from the internet will be considered a violation of academic integrity, and will be grounds for a failing grade. 

In constructing your argument, you should restrict yourself to examining the relevant portions of the texts, and clearly pointing to those passages that support your particular reading of the text. In addition, you are called upon to some extent to synthesize the various views under consideration, by contrasting the approaches of the two authors. 

Answer the following question in an essay of approximately 1250 words:

“Compare and contrast Plato and Aristotle’s views on both the best kind of human life, and the best kind of regime or political rule. To what can we attribute the differences in their views on these issues?  (Hint: Make sure you discuss the role of teleological thinking within each thinker’s writings, and the differences in their respective approaches to teleology.) 

In writing this essay, make sure you identify the basic assumptions (regarding human nature, the order of the universe, the role of human beings within this order, human capacities, the nature of political rule, etc.) upon which each thinker bases his claims. How do these assumptions lead to the conclusions about human life that each thinker arrives at?  Make sure also that you address the question of what accounts for each thinker’s emphasis on a particular kind of regime, what the alternatives are to their ideal regime, and why those alternatives are considered inadequate. Finally, who is the ideal kind of ruler or statesman for Plato and for Aristotle, and to what extent does each of them believe that the ideal regime can or cannot be achieved? What accounts for the difference in their views?

Please note that your essay should not resemble a “laundry-list” of items that simply summarizes all of the ideas above.  Rather, the first part of the question (in bold type) is meant to be the central and primary question to be addressed.  The rest of the prompt gives you secondary questions, all of which are designed to aid you in making secondary arguments. In a paper that flows well, the secondary arguments will coherently come together to support the central argument of the paper, in response to the central question. In other words, a good answer to the primary question depends not only on constructing good arguments in response to the secondary questions, it requires understanding the correct relationship of all the secondary arguments to one another, and to the primary question.  Note, therefore, that you do not need to address the secondary arguments in the order that they appear in the prompt above.  It is more important your argument flows logically and well, while making the right connections between all the requisite ideas.

Annotated Bibliography for HITRUST ( Health Information Trust Alliance)

/in /by

Your paper must be in correct APA format, use correct grammar, and will need to include at least seven (7) resources, ALL of which must:

1) Be current. Published within the last few years.

2) Be peer-reviewed.

3) Relate directly to your topic

For each annotation, your should provide;

1) the APA formatted reference entry.

2) analysis of the credibility of the resource.

3) justification of the value of the resource to development of your research.

USE YOUR OWN WORDS!!!! DO NOT PLAGIARIZE!!!!

Remember that an annotation is not the same as an abstract. Abstracts are descriptive. Your annotations are to be evaluative and critical. Give me enough information for me to decide if I’m interested enough to read the paper, and also how you perceive the paper. Don’t go skimpy on these annotations, but DO NOT write too much here. Quality is far more important that quantity. This exercise is for each of you to demonstrate that you can identify, categorize, and digest multiple research papers.

Every resource you choose must be peer reviewed. That means the paper must have undergone a formal peer review before being published in a journal or presented at a conference. You must ensure that your resources have undergone rigorous reviews. In most cases, you can find out the review process for a conference or journal by visiting the appropriate web site. Do not simply assume that a resource is peer reviewed – check it out.

Here are a few URLs with additional information: (I strongly suggest that you look at these. Really.)

https://sites.umuc.edu/library/libhow/bibliography_apa.cfm

https://www.bethel.edu/library/research/apa-annobib-sixth.pdf

http://libguides.enc.edu/writing_basics/annotatedbib/apa <<<< Check out the “Rules! rules! rules!” section

http://guides.library.cornell.edu/annotatedbibliography

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/614/03/

 

“Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!”

The post Annotated Bibliography for HITRUST ( Health Information Trust Alliance) appeared first on Nursing Experts Help.

You tube video | Management homework help

/in /by

 

The video assignment’s due date is on your Schedule available with the Syllabus; you may submit it early.  See the Assignment section of Blackboard to submit the assignments.

In this assignment, you will submit an assessment of  5 YouTube videos. (Click on ” YouTube Video Assignment Information” for a list of highlighted assigned  YouTube videos).

Answer the following questions per each YouTube video:

1) What project management concepts does the video illustrate? Be clear and support your statements with an article from a project management-related journal. Do NOT use Wikipedia! You should access the UHD library databases (ABI Informs, Business Source Complete, and/or Google Scholar); do not just Google for a URL. This must be scholarly peer-reviewed in content.

2) What does your textbook state regarding this concept? Be specific! Cite the textbook correctly.

3) How good do you think this video is in relationship to PM concepts and theory? 

Include a References page and use APA for citations. (See APA guidelines at this website and/or the library.)