Ashford 3 Week 2 Discussion 1 Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 2023
Ashford 3: – Week 2 – 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. Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your post and responses.
Your 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-Euthanasia
For 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 classmate’s post by considering the opposite side of their argument. Explain what the other side’s 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 Suicide
Review the Dr. Jack Kevorkian’s “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 question…but 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 classmate’s 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 Privacy
Review the Electronic Health Records: Privacy and Security video. 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 classmate’s 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.