Part 1

The Threaded Discussions are like mini-classroom presentations. Each week a question will be presented for your consideration. You must submit your first post by Thursday; posts two and three must be posted by Sunday. All three posts must be on three separate days, and must be supported by a reference (i.e. a citation to your source). Your posts should be very formal, with proper use of citations, grammar, and spelling. Casual conversations should be limited to the Open Bar.

This is the CRITERIA that your posts will be graded on:

• The depth of understanding you display
• The accuracy of your cites (citations are mandatory)
• Your writing skills (grammar / spelling)
• Proper word count (between 150 – 250 words ONLY)
• The quality of your interaction with other students in the discussion

Week 3 Law Talk Topic: At Will, Yes or No?

This week we will be discussing the “at-will” doctrine as it applies to the medical field. You should read Chapter 20 before proceeding with this assignment.

Scenario

Mr. Con Fused has been an employee at Regional Hospital for the past five years. His employment there was recently terminated. The reason for the termination was: Inability to follow instructions. However, Regional has adopted an “at-will” policy. So in reality, no reason has to be given for the termination. Never the less, Mr. Fused was very upset at his termination….so upset, that he went to the media with his story.

Scenario for Post 1

You work for the human resources department at Regional. The hospital attorney is preparing for a news conference regarding the termination of Mr. Fused. In an effort to help the attorney, you draft justifications for an “at-will” termination of a hospital employee. What are your reasons for supporting this policy? Your job is to convince the public that this is a necessary and useful policy.

Scenario for Post 2

Now you work for a public advocacy group that has decided to help Mr. Fused. You hold a news conference in response to the hospital’s news conference. What flaws do you find in the hospital’s position? Why is “at-will” wrong for the medical industry? Be sure to read through posts of your fellow students, then select the “hospital” post that interests you the most.

Scenario for Post 3

Now you choose. Read the posts submitted by the class. Which side seems more logical to you? Should the medical industry abide by an “at-will” doctrine? Why / why not? Be sure to cite to a fellow student’s post.

Here is an example of a post that meets criteria:

Roe v Wade was decided in 1973. The Supreme Court at that time determined that a woman had a right to choose. One of the “underpinning” issues of Roe is a right to privacy. The right to privacy is addressed in the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, 13th and 14th Amendments.

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed Roe v Wade 38 times (1). In 1992, Casey v Planned Parenthood,14 F.3d 848, the Court ruled 5-4 to uphold the core of Roe v. Wade, the right to privacy. In this case, the Supreme Court stated, “the ability of women to participate equally in economics and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives and that this ability to control their reproductive lives was enough of a reliance to sustain Roe.”(2). This conclusion by the court specifically affirmed the doctrine stare decisis as it applies to Roe v Wade.(3)

In my opinion the original ruling in 1973, 38 reaffirmations, the 1992 affirmation of Roe v. Wade doctrine of Stare Decisis , the rights to privacy as indicated above, along with the fact that this law has become a law that has come “to be relied on”(4), makes it obvious that this is “settled law”. However, Judge Alito’s refusal to commit to one side or the other, has enabled him to avoid hanging himself with either the pro-life or the pro-choice side. In my opinion, Judge Alito is not correct in his refusal to acknowledge Roe v Wade as settled law.

1. & 4.)www.talkleft.com
2. & 3.)www.democracynow.com

Word Count: 204

Part 2

Week 4 Chapter Review Questions

Please complete the following REVIEW QUESTIONS from your textbook. You do not have to write out the questions. However, your answers should be in complete sentences. All Chapters should be submitted in ONE DOCUMENT and in MS WORD FORMAT.

• Chapter 19 Review Questions
• Chapter 20 Review Questions
• Chapter 21 Review Questions
• Chapter 22 Review Questions

Part 3

Week 4 Open Bar

This is your local bar (either coffee or sports….the choice is yours). Here, you will discuss the material covered this week. Consider this assignment as a weekly study session with your friends from school.

I will only pop in from time to time, but will not participate in your discussions. This is your time to bond with classmates and to discuss the material among yourselves.

By the time this assignment is complete, you will have an outline by which to study from for your exams. All exam questions are covered by the review topics.

As you review this week’s topics, be sure to relax, enjoy your beverage of choice, have fun, and get to know your fellow students.

This is your assignment…..

1.Choose two topics from this week’s review (posted below).

2.Answer ONE review topic PER post
You will need TWO posts, so you will outline TWO review topics in total.

3.Start each post with the topic number that you are answering. For example: Topic 1. This will help students readily identify which topics remain unanswered.

4.Each post must be a minimum of 100 words.

5.In your posts, be sure to cite the textbook page number where you found the information.

6.Try to have both posts submitted by Thursday of this week (this way you will have time to make outlines for the exams).

7.Do not outline a topic that has already been explained by a fellow student.

8.If all of the topics have been explained, pick a topic that you feel needs further explanation. Add more information on that topic by way of outside research, examples, and more detail.

9.You will not get credit for repeating information that has already been stated in another post. You want to complete this assignment early. That way, you are not restricted by what other students have already discussed.

10.Points will be deducted for poor grammar, spelling, failing to cite accurately, and failing to meet the word count.

The goal of this assignment…..

Your goal is to create an outline for your exams. Take the material that is posted in the Open Bar, organize it, and you will have a complete review for the exams. The Open Bar from weeks 1 and 2 will prepare you for the midterm; the Open Bar from weeks 3 and 4 will prepare you for the final exam and post test.

IMPORTANT note…..

This assignment is not as formal as Law Talk, so feel free to engage in casual conversation. You can discuss your job, your hobbies, your family, or anything at all that seems interesting (but please keep it at a PG rating).

• When submitting a casual post, be sure to start it with the title:

• CASUAL POST (instead of a topic review number).
• This way, students can select your post if they just want to socialize, or select the review posts if they want to study.

Casual posts do NOT count towards your grade.

CHEERS!

Review Topics for Week 4

• How does the HCQIA help in peer review; what was Congress’ intent in passing that law?
• What are the exceptions to the “employment at will doctrine”?

• Refer to Ch. 20 review for a summary of those exceptions.
• What is the purpose of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973?
• What do most medical professional liability insurance policies cover?

• Refer to the Chapter Review for a summary.
• What are the different parts of a standard liability insurance policy?
• What is self-insurance?What does the NLRA have jurisdiction over?
• What are the grounds upon which an employer (based in “at-will” state) CANNOT terminate employment?
• How can exposure to liability be reduced?
• According to federal regulations, how long must HMOs hold open enrollment for?
• What did the following cases hold:

• St. Paul Insurance Co. v. Talladega Nursing Home

Part 1

For this week’s discussion, answer the following questions in one post, then reply to at least 2 of your peers’ posts.

1. There is a well-documented association between income and health, what do you believe are some of the main reasons for this?

2. How can education improve health in individuals? In communities?

3. Why is paying close attention to education, income, and other socioeconomic factors so important to epidemiologists?

Part 2

Week 2 Project: Descriptive Statistics

This week you will submit Part 2: Descriptive Statistics of the four-part project. For this project, you will assume the role of a public health leader in your community (County or City). In this role, you are tasked with improving the overall health of your local community. You have been asked to develop a plan for health promotion and disease prevention and then present your plan to a board of policymakers for approval.

In Part 2 of your project, now that you have researched and presented the top health issues you need to create a presentation for the board that shows descriptive statistics on health care issues.

Using PowerPoint or a similar program (Google Slides, Prezi, Keynote, Canva), create 5 different graphs/charts that answer the following:

1. Rank the top 5 health issues from the highest impact to the lowest.

2. Show what percent of the population is impacted by each issue

3. Choose at least one of the health issues and show progression over 5 years.

4. Show distribution by age of a least one of the health issues.

5. Show key demographics (example: race, age, income, sex, etc.) impacted by at least one of the health issues.

Also, follow these steps

1. In excel (you do not need to turn this in -this is an example of where I made the charts). You do not have to use excel to make the charts if you have other chart-making tools you may use those.

2 In the sample PowerPoint – yours should look like this. Follow the live chat for the full tutorial. This is what the assignment should look like.

epidemiology assignment 2.xlsx

epidemiology ^N2 chart.pptx epidemiology ^N2 chart.pptx – Alternative Formats – Alternative Formats

HERE ARE THE SITES TO GET STARTED:

STEP 1: Get the data by searching your state or region – use the search top 5 health issues.

STEP 2 – Go to the website that has the best data – state public health or CDC websites are the best

STEP 3- Create a table of the top five health issues. This is question #1 in the project

STEP 4 – create your charts this is questions bullet points 2 to 5. Then put your charts into your PowerPoint (or similar program)

Here are a few links to DATA Sets

FLORIDA:

http://www.flhealthcharts.com/charts/default.aspx

NATIONWIDE BY STATE:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/

PART 1

See discussion requirements under Week 1 discussion above.

CONFIRMATION BIAS

I regretfully apologize for the extended instruction, but I could not avoid it! And please watch the Movie Moments, too!
The absolute biggest obstacle to critical thinking is ‘confirmation bias.’

There are many definitions and most mention the searching for information confirming our beliefs: you must know that that is not intentional – most often not even conscious! We are, by and large, unaware of being biased.

There are many errors we commit during even one single day. ‘Why the errors,’ you may ask, and the short answer is that we (have to) use shortcuts when we form opinions because it would be impossible to research and study each and every decision, judgment, and opinion before we form them — and that would be most of the time unnecessary anyway.

The most serious errors in thinking we tend to commit are usually due to ‘confirmation bias.’ If people would not be biased they could come to an agreement or a compromise after careful deliberations, considering that that would be in their best interest — but it rarely happens: from big government vs. small government to term limits to ‘who is “the” racist’ (as if it could be only one group), affirmative action, the death penalty, abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage, drug laws, republicans versus democrats, liberals vs. conservatives, labor unions, taxes, health care law, gun control, animal rights, ‘vaccination issues,’ ‘a women’s place is in the kitchen’ (or not!), jobless benefits, environmental protection, wars, education, evolution, school prayer, police powers, ‘living wages,’ drinking age, alternative medicine, GMOs (genetically modified crops), speed limit, government data collection… just to name a few.

The basis of conflict often is the subjective nature of our decisions. Disagreements, disputes, screaming matches, physical fights, lawsuits, and war between nations are all there to prove in a very real and painful way that at least one party must be wrong in each conflict/disagreement while strongly believing just the opposite (but in most cases, both are — even if not always equally. How can that happen?

Our book mentions cognitive bias and discusses actual examples of it in various chapters (briefly and well): Pgs. 6, 102-104, 109, 110, 116, 123, 145, 312-314, and 348-349, but it does not define it clearly.

Confirmation bias is the UNCONSCIOUS tendency to confirm our already existing leanings, propensities, beliefs, and prejudices, or hasty decisions.

We are not only ignorant of our biases but are also often unable to recognize them even when they are pointed out to us! We will rather believe that those who call us biased are biased, mistaken, and/or malicious (please check out ‘fundamental attribution error’).

We often commit the following errors related to confirmation bias:
Selective scrutiny: accepting data/argument without much scrutiny from sources or for proposals we like but with much scrutiny from the ones we do not like (example: buying a new car)

Selective recall: remembering events that support our opinion and not those that contradict it

Pattern seeking: seeing ‘proof’ that ‘something is going on’ because of certain ‘mysterious’ coincidences (see Movie Moment #1).

Affirming the question: when people are asked if they are happy with their social life, almost 70% would answer yes and about 20% no, but if the question is asked the other way, asking them if they are unhappy with their social life, then approx. 70% would respond yes to that question as well (in each instance, people think about reasons they may be happy — or unhappy — and find enough reasons to say, yes, they are.

Avoiding cognitive dissonance: accepting certain ideas because they are consistent with our existing worldview/opinion or rejecting others because they are not — instead of working through the issues themselves (which can be very difficult and/or unsettling)

Demanding ‘yes or no answers:’ (seeing in black and white) being convinced that there must be absolutely good solutions, perfect (or perfectly rotten) people, or believing that someone who ‘opposes’ a ‘bad’ person is necessarily a ‘good’ person (as if we have never heard of gangs warring over turf, killing each other, for example). We often justify our (faulty) judgment by pointing out that the alternative is less than perfect as well.

The above issues are but the tip of the iceberg, so to speak, when it comes to confirmation bias (yes, there is an enormous amount of research about it).

YOUR ASSIGNMENT

Please read the pages in the book on confirmation bias and research it on the internet — and then, please describe an occasion that happened lately when you caught yourself falling into confirmation bias but after all ended up correcting yourself. Please do not forget: lying, cheating, consciously twisting the facts or torturing reasoning are NOT confirmation bias (they are just not the best behavior); however, strongly and often passionately believing that we are correct when all the evidence contradicting it is in front of our nose is the consequence of confirmation bias.

Part 1– Your initial post: State your answers backed by the evidence you found. This ‘initial post’ has to be at least 300 words and is due by midnight on Wednesday.
Part 2– Your response to two students: These comments have to be at least 200 words and are due on two different days.

https://youtu.be/JhjUJTw2i1M

PART 2

Critical Review-Evaluating Scientific Reports in the Media – Assignment

It is important that you learn how to critically review research. In our society today, we are exposed to so much information and so many studies. Some of that information is excellent, some is useful, and some is very, very bad. How can you determine what information is useful and what is dangerous? One way is to take a course like Critical Thinking; however, the facts that I give you will be outdated all too soon. The most important thing you will learn from this course — and from your college education — is how to evaluate the information critically that is presented to you. Critical thinking involves asking five questions: who, what, when, where, how.

1. Find and read an article in the media or a video clip that reports the results of a scientific study. You must include the link to the website. It is essential that the article you review would either argue for something or present a theory or idea with supporting evidence for its claims or conclusion. News items, even if they are about scientific discoveries are not suited for this assignment because news items report the news (naturally) and provide no theory or arguments and supporting evidence that could be criticized based on its strengths/weaknesses. Explanations/educational articles (such as WebMD explaining to us what certain conditions are) not good for our purposes either because they teach us something, telling us what is what, and thus do not provide supporting evidence that could be criticized. Teaching/explaining are very different from arguing! Please keep this in mind when you choose an article!
2. Discuss how accurately did the mass media report the study?
3. Answer the above five questions about the article (Who, What, When, Where, and How). Refer to page 353 of your text and be sure to cover all the highlights discussed.
4. Do NOT use entertainment or sports articles for your review. The articles must be research-based and must include claims/conclusions and supporting evidence, which are to be criticized!.

Directions:

You will write a one-page critical review of the article. The review should answer each of the five questions. You must cite your source. If it is a website, please make sure you put the entire web address. Remember you are evaluating critically, not just summarizing. See the examples below the grading rubric:

Week 4: Critical Review	Point Value
Adequately covers and answers the 5 questions, plus the summary section (10 points per section)	60 points
Chooses a scholarly/research article that presents a claim/idea/conclusion + supporting evidence that can be evaluated based on the strength/weakness of that evidence	20 points
Meets the required word minimum (150 words) and posts word count	10 points
Follows APA formatting with parenthetical citations and referencing	10 points
Total:	100 points

Part 1

The Threaded Discussions are like mini-classroom presentations. Each week a question will be presented for your consideration. You must submit your first post by Thursday; posts two and three must be posted by Sunday. All three posts must be on three separate days, and must be supported by a reference (i.e. a citation to your source). Your posts should be very formal, with proper use of citations, grammar, and spelling. Casual conversations should be limited to the Open Bar.

This is the CRITERIA that your posts will be graded on:

• The depth of understanding you display
• The accuracy of your cites (citations are mandatory)
• Your writing skills (grammar / spelling)
• Proper word count (between 150 – 250 words ONLY)
• The quality of your interaction with other students in the discussion

Week 1 Law Talk Topic: State of Emergency

You should refer to page 62 in your text for a basic understanding of false imprisonment and contagious diseases before completing this assignment. Remember, you must do outside research in order to thoroughly understand the issues involved.

Scenario

This week, we will discuss the ethical considerations surrounding the forced containment of those who may become infected with the Ebola virus.

For this assignment, you will first play the role of a senior advisor to the President of the United States. He has asked you to assist him in persuading the American people that containment is ethical.

You will then play the opposing role – a private citizen who opposes containment. Your job here will be to argue that containment is not ethical.

Finally, for your third post, respond to one of your classmates’ post and argue against the position in the post you respond to. You will either argue in favor containment or against containment.

Be sure to title your posts accordinglyLet the class know if it is Post 1, Post 2, or Post 3.

Here is a summary of the three posts you will submit this week:

POST 1:

Provide the American people (i.e. class members) with your justifications for containment. You should persuade them to believe that containing their sick family members is ethical.

POST 2:

For post 2, you are no longer a presidential advisor. You are now a private citizen who opposes containment. Choose a fellow student’s post, and state your objections. Your job is to persuade that particular presidential advisor (i.e. that student’s post) that containment is unethical. Be sure to choose a post that has not already been responded to.

POST 3:

Now you choose a side; you can either be a presidential advisor, or a private citizen. Review the posts submitted by your colleagues, and respond to one. This is your final opportunity to persuade your audience in either direction. If you’re a presidential advisor, convince us that containment is ethical. If you’re a private citizen, convince us that containment is not ethical.

Here is an example of a post that meets criteria:

Roe v Wade was decided in 1973. The Supreme Court at that time determined that a woman had a right to choose. One of the “underpinning” issues of Roe is a right to privacy. The right to privacy is addressed in the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, 13th and 14th Amendments.

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed Roe v Wade 38 times (1). In 1992, Casey v Planned Parenthood,14 F.3d 848, the Court ruled 5-4 to uphold the core of Roe v. Wade, the right to privacy. In this case, the Supreme Court stated, “the ability of women to participate equally in economics and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives and that this ability to control their reproductive lives was enough of a reliance to sustain Roe.”(2). This conclusion by the court specifically affirmed the doctrine stare decisis as it applies to Roe v Wade.(3)

In my opinion the original ruling in 1973, 38 reaffirmations, the 1992 affirmation of Roe v. Wade doctrine of Stare Decisis , the rights to privacy as indicated above, along with the fact that this law has become a law that has come “to be relied on”(4), makes it obvious that this is “settled law”. However, Judge Alito’s refusal to commit to one side or the other, has enabled him to avoid hanging himself with either the pro-life or the pro-choice side. In my opinion, Judge Alito is not correct in his refusal to acknowledge Roe v Wade as settled law.

1. & 4.)www.talkleft.com
2. & 3.)www.democracynow.com

Word Count: 204

Part 2

Chapter Review Questions

Please complete the following REVIEW QUESTIONS from your textbook. You do not have to write out the questions. However, your answers should be in complete sentences. All Chapters should be submitted in ONE DOCUMENT and in MS WORD

FORMAT.

• Chapter 2 Review Questions
• Chapter 3 Review Questions
• Chapter 9 Review Questions

Part 3

Open Bar Discussion

This is your assignment…..

1. Choose two topics from this week’s review (posted below).
2. Answer ONE review topic PER post
3. You will need TWO posts, so you will outline TWO review topics in total.3) Start each post with the topic number that you are answering. For example: Topic 1. This will help students readily identify which topics remain unanswered.
4. Each post must be a minimum of 100 words.
5. In your posts, be sure to cite the textbook page number where you found the information.
6. Try to have both posts submitted by Thursday of this week (this way you will have time to make outlines for the exams).
7. Do not outline a topic that has already been explained by a fellow student.
8. If all of the topics have been explained, pick a topic that you feel needs further explanation. Add more information on that topic by way of outside research, examples, and more detail.
9. You will not get credit for repeating information that has already been stated in another post. You want to complete this assignment early. That way, you are not restricted by what other students have already discussed.
10. Points will be deducted for poor grammar, spelling, failing to cite accurately, and failing to meet the word count.

• When submitting a casual post, be sure to start it with the title:

• CASUAL POST (instead of a topic review number).
• This way, students can select your post if they just want to socialize, or select the review posts if they want to study.

Review Topics for Week 1

• What are the different sources of law, such as:

• Common law
• Statutory law
• Administrative law
• Standard of care
• What are the elements of negligence?
• What is the theory of respondent superior?
• What are the various forms of authority held by health care corporations?
• What do these terms mean:

• Res judicata
• Res ipsa loquitur
• Stare decisis
• Independent contractor
• How does a plaintiff win a strict liability claim?
• What is the Department of Health and Human Services responsible for?
• What is the Department of Labor responsible for?
• What are torts?
• Who is liable in a products liability case, and to whom?
• What do the following cases hold:

• Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital
• Leavitt v. St. Tammany
• Dickinson v. Mailliard

Part 4

Project Description – Due in Week 3

For your final project, you will be discussing issues related to ethics. These are controversial and heated topics, so there will be plenty to discuss. Specifically, you will be reading about Theresa Schiavo, which was a very heated case in 2005.

Please follow these directions:

1. Read the timeline of the Schiavo case at: https://bioethics.miami.edu/clinical-and-research-ethics/terri-schiavo-project/timeline-of-key-events/index.html
2. Do some of your own independent research on Terri Schiavo. You must have at least five (5) sources cited in your paper.
3. Analyze the research in order to determine who was ethically correct in your opinion; the husband or the parents.
4. Write a persuasive research paper on your findings, thoughts, and opinions. Pick a side, and defend it.
5. Your paper should be at least three (3) full pages, but no more than five (5) full pages. You should have two additional pages: one with your sources, and one as a cover page.
6. Please cite to all sources using either footnotes or endnotes. If you are unfamiliar with this, please refer to the APA website for formatting help: (https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/general_format.html)
7. Use quotation marks properly when citing your sources. Again, please refer to the site above for help with quotations.
8. No more than 20% of your paper can be a direct quote. I want YOUR analysis, not something that is copied from a website.
9. Submit your paper by 11:59 PM (EST) on Sunday of Week Three.
10. Your paper should have one-inch margins all around, typed in Times New Roman (12″) font, and must be saved as an MS Word document (doc.).

Part 1

The representation shows five concentric circles. The first inner circle represents age, sex, and constitutional factors. The second circle represents individual lifestyle factors. The third circle represents social and community networks. The fourth circle represents living and working conditions that include unemployment, water and sanitation, healthcare services, housing, work, education, and agriculture and food production. The fifth circle represents general socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental conditions.

Reprinted from: Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. Levelling up (part 2): a discussion paper on European strategies for tackling social inequities in health, studies on social and economic determinants of population health. WHO Collaborating Centre for Policy Research on Social Determinants of Health. The University of Liverpool. Available at: http://www.who.int/social_determinants/resources/leveling_up_part2.pdf. Copyright © 2006.

Review the graphic and “leveling up part 2” PDF and answer the following:

1. What effect do social conditions have on their health?

2. What does the term determinant of health mean?

3. How can inequities in health be assessed?

leveling_up_part2.pdf

Part 2

Week 1 Project: Defining Epidemiology

Epidemiology APA Module 1 APA template_1_.docx Epidemiology APA Module 1 APA template_1_.docx – Alternative Formats

This week you will submit Part 1 of the four-part project. For this project, you will assume the role of a public health leader in your community (County or City). In this role, you are tasked with improving the overall health of your local community. You have been asked to develop a plan for health promotion and disease prevention and then present your plan to a board of policymakers for approval.

In Part 1 of your project, you will develop an executive summary describing key aspects of epidemiology. You will also research and present the top five health care issues in your community and explain the determinants impacting these health issues. Follow the template provided to address the following areas.

1. Present to the board a brief history and explanation of epidemiology and how it plays a role in disease prevention and health promotion. Your goal is to educate the board on the role Epidemiology

2. Describe the top health issues in your community. Provide data that supports your findings

3. Describe the key determinants to health that impact the top health issues.

4. Cite your references in APA using current, academic, and evidence-based sources. Use the template provided.

FOLLOW the attached file above.

PART 1

The Threaded Discussions are like mini-classroom presentations. Each week a question will be presented for your consideration. You must submit your first post by Thursday; posts two and three must be posted by Sunday. All three posts must be on three separate days, and must be supported by a reference (i.e. a citation to your source). Your posts should be very formal, with proper use of citations, grammar, and spelling. Casual conversations should be limited to the Open Bar.

This is the CRITERIA that your posts will be graded on:

• The depth of understanding you display
• The accuracy of your cites (citations are mandatory)
• Your writing skills (grammar / spelling)
• Proper word count (between 150 – 250 words ONLY)
• The quality of your interaction with other students in the discussion

Week 2 Law Talk Topic:

This week we will be discussing the liability that hospitals face. You should read Chapter 10 before proceeding with this assignment. Each post will require to assume a different role. Be sure to read the scenarios carefully and follow the instructions for each particular post.

Scenario for Post 1

You are a hospital administrator who grants privileges to several local doctors. Your liability insurance carrier wants to know what steps you are taking to ensure the competence of those doctors. Provide a list to the insurance company that outlines what you look for in your doctors. Your goal is to be as complete as possible. Why? If you’re not, the insurance company will deny the policy, and leave your hospital open to liability. No pressure, but your job is on the line if the company denies the policy.

Scenario for Post 2

Now you represent the insurance company. Read through the posts that your fellow students submitted as their first post. Find a post that interests you, then respond to it. Remember, you are now representing the insurance company. Your goal is to question the hospital’s ability to find competent doctors. Are they covering their bases? Should the hospital be considering other factors when granting privileges to doctors? If this hospital does grant privileges to incompetent doctors, your job is on the line. Why? Because you provided the hospital with a policy, and it will have to pay on a malpractice suit if one of their doctors is negligent. So be thorough!

Scenario for Post 3

Read through the posts submitted by your fellow students. Come to your own conclusion about insurance carriers. In your opinion, are insurance companies unfair to hospitals? Are they in it solely for financial gain? What about the hospitals, are they being competent and thorough? Provide as much information as you can regarding your opinion on hospital liability for incompetent doctors and the insurance industry. For this post, cite to a fellow student’s post as support for your position.

Here is an example of a post that meets criteria:

Roe v Wade was decided in 1973. The Supreme Court at that time determined that a woman had a right to choose. One of the “underpinning” issues of Roe is a right to privacy. The right to privacy is addressed in the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, 13th and 14th Amendments. The Supreme Court has reaffirmed Roe v Wade 38 times (1). In 1992, Casey v Planned Parenthood,14 F.3d 848, the Court ruled 5-4 to uphold the core of Roe v. Wade, the right to privacy. In this case, the Supreme Court stated, “the ability of women to participate equally in economics and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives and that this ability to control their reproductive lives was enough of a reliance to sustain Roe.”(2). This conclusion by the court specifically affirmed the doctrine stare decisis as it applies to Roe v Wade.(3) In my opinion the original ruling in 1973, 38 reaffirmations, the 1992 affirmation of Roe v. Wade doctrine of Stare Decisis , the rights to privacy as indicated above, along with the fact that this law has become a law that has come “to be relied on”(4), makes it obvious that this is “settled law”. However, Judge Alito’s refusal to commit to one side or the other, has enabled him to avoid hanging himself with either the pro-life or the pro-choice side. In my opinion, Judge Alito is not correct in his refusal to acknowledge Roe v Wade as settled law. & 4.)www.talkleft.com & 3.)www.democracynow.com Word Count: 204

PART 2

Week 2 Chapter Review Questions

Please complete the following REVIEW QUESTIONS from your textbook. You do not have to write out the questions. However, your answers should be in complete sentences. All Chapters should be submitted in ONE DOCUMENT and in MS WORD FORMAT.

• Chapter 10 Review Questions
• Chapter 11 Review Questions
• Chapter 12 Review Questions

PART 3

This is your assignment…..

1. Choose two topics from this week’s review (posted below).
2. Answer ONE review topic PER post
   You will need TWO posts, so you will outline TWO review topics in total.
3. Start each post with the topic number that you are answering. For example: Topic 1. This will help students readily identify which topics remain unanswered.
4. Each post must be a minimum of 100 words.
5. In your posts, be sure to cite the textbook page number where you found the information.
6. Try to have both posts submitted by Thursday of this week (this way you will have time to make outlines for the exams).
7. Do not outline a topic that has already been explained by a fellow student.
8. If all of the topics have been explained, pick a topic that you feel needs further explanation. Add more information on that topic by way of outside research, examples, and more detail.
9. You will not get credit for repeating information that has already been stated in another post. You want to complete this assignment early. That way, you are not restricted by what other students have already discussed.
10. Points will be deducted for poor grammar, spelling, failing to cite accurately, and failing to meet the word count.

The goal of this assignment…..

Your goal is to create an outline for your exams. Take the material that is posted in the Open Bar, organize it, and you will have a complete review for the exams. The Open Bar from weeks 1 and 2 will prepare you for the midterm; the Open Bar from weeks 3 and 4 will prepare you for the final exam and post test.

IMPORTANT note…..

This assignment is not as formal as Law Talk, so feel free to engage in casual conversation. You can discuss your job, your hobbies, your family, or anything at all that seems interesting (but please keep it at a PG rating).

• When submitting a casual post, be sure to start it with the title:

• CASUAL POST (instead of a topic review number).
• This way, students can select your post if they just want to socialize, or select the review posts if they want to study.

Casual posts do NOT count towards your grade.

CHEERS!

Review Topics for Week 2

• What can a nurse licensing board suspend a nurse’s license for?
• How often are physician credentials reviewed?
• What do courts look at to determine the duty of care owed by emergency rooms?
• What is the standard of care owed by chiropractors?
• What are the duties of a:

• Nurse practitioner
• Clinical nurse specialist
• Nurse manager
• How is a doctor / patient relationship terminated?
• What do the following cases hold:

• Romero v. Bellino
• Fernandez v. State
• Lucchesi v. Stimmell
• What claims does EMTALA provide for?
• What are common reasons for the filing of dental malpractice cases?

WEEK 3 CHAPTER REVIEW QUESTIONS

CHAPTER 13

1. Describe the importance of information management planning.
2. Describe the importance and contents of medical records.
3. Explain the importance of maintaining complete and accurate records.
4. Discuss how the Privacy Act of 1974 & the HIPAA of 1996 safeguard a patient’s privacy.
5. Explain the ownership of and who can access a patient’s medical record.
6. Describe the advantages and disadvantages of electronic medical records.
7. Describe why the medical record is important in legal proceedings.
8. Describe a variety of ways in which medical records have been falsified.
9. Explain what is meant by the medical record battleground.

done

1 day ago

CHAPTER 14

1. Discuss the rights and responsibilities of patients as reviewed in this chapter.
2. Discuss the distinction among verbal, written, and implied consent.
3. Describe the role of the patient, physician, nurse, and hospital in obtaining informed consent.
4. Explain how consent differs among competent patients, minors, guardians, and incompetent patients.
5. Explain the available defenses for defendants as it relates to informed consent.
6. Can a patient consent to a procedure and then withdraw it? Discuss your answer.
7. Discuss under what circumstances parental consent for a minor might not be necessary.
8. . Describe the rights and responsibilities of patients.
9. Why should caregivers should consider themselves patient advocates?
10. Describe what can patients can do to help prevent medical errors.

done

1 day ago

CHAPTER 15

1. Describe how ethical theories differ and how ethical principles are helpful to caregivers and the ethics committee in resolving ethical dilemmas.
2. Describe how spirituality and religion help to shape one’s healthcare choices.
3. Describe why healthcare decisions can change as circumstances change.
4. Describe the consultative role of the ethics committee when addressing ethical dilemmas.

done

1 day ago

CHAPTER 17

1. Describe how patient autonomy has been impacted by case law and legislative enactments.
2. Discuss the following concepts: preservation of life with limits, euthanasia, advance directives, futility of treatment, withholding and withdrawal of treatment, and do-not-resuscitate orders.
3. Explain end-of-life issues as they relate to autopsy, organ donations, research experimentation, and clinical trials.
4. Describe how human genetics and stem cell research can have an impact on end-of-life issues.
5. Discuss the importance of genetic markers.
6. Explain the reason the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act was enacted.

done

1 day ago

CHAPTER 18

1. Describe various forms of child abuse, how to recognize it, and reporting requirements.
2. Describe various forms of elder abuse, how to recognize it, and reporting requirements.
3. Discuss importance of reporting births and deaths.
4. Explain why it is important to report communicable diseases, adverse drug reactions, and infectious diseases.
5. Explain how and why physician incompetency is reported.
6. Explain the importance of incident reporting, sentinel events, and the purpose of root cause analyses.

PART 1

Deliverables

Answer the EVEN OR ODD “Chapter Review Questions” at the end of Chapters 1, 2 and 3 (see pages 24, 55 and 88) in complete, grammatically correct sentences. Number each question to correspond to the number on the question being answered and submit one Microsoft Word compatible document with all answers.

PART 2

Week 1 Application Project

Complete either the Excel Application Exercise (3-21 on page 89) OR the Access Application Exercise (3-22 on page 89) at the end of Chapter 3 from Introduction to Information Systems. Data files referenced in the application exercise directions in the text are attached below.

Ch03Ex01.xlsx

Ch03Ex02.xlsx

Submit the completed Microsoft Excel spreadsheet file or completed Microsoft Access database file to Application Project Week 1 submission link above.

PART 3

Discussion is Discussion in Class Talk

Welcome to the Class Talk discussion forum. Within this discussion board you will do two things. First, one or more topics will be presented for discussion. These topics will generally consist of an article from the outside world that pertains to the topics discussed in class that week. Read the topic article, research any related and relevant material pertaining to the topic, and make a minimum of 3 substantial and well researched posts to each topic. Your first post MUST take place by Wednesday for you to receive full credit. The purpose of the forum is to have a discussion back and forth between you, me and other class mates. That can’t happen if you make all your posts the same day or late in the week.

To get minimum credit in our collaborative discussion, a minimum of three well researched posts on at least three separate days of the week is required for each topic. To make this collaborative, an initial post early in the week is necessary and then followed with at least two subsequent posts that could include any rebuttal comments on the position that other students have taken.