Fluent Essays

see attached for classmate post and replysomeone who can write at a graduate level, not to hard i have attached my inital post as well so you can compare and contrast my post with that of my classmates classmate_post.docx replies.doc my_post_1.docx Unformatted Attachment Preview Classmate #1Bioethical Issues Related to Personalized Medicine Healthcare has seen significant changes over the past decades. While some advancements seem like direct blessings from God, others are very questionable. Often, we are presented with situations that test our code of ethics, morality, and faith in God and remain clueless about the best course of action. We often find scientists denying the existence of God because of their mathematical and scientific discoveries. As author Collins F. S. stated in his book “The Language of God,” “I gradually became convinced that everything in the universe could be explained on the basis of equations and physical principles,” (Chapter 1). Healthcare professionals deal with countless ethical issues daily; one of them is personalized medicine, which will be analyzed below. Personalized medicine is a sophisticated treatment practice that utilizes a patient’s genetic profile to create specific care management. This approach helps prevent, diagnose, and treat diseases with proper medication (genome.gov). Unfortunately, this method has raised significant ethical dilemmas in the healthcare field. In the article titled “Ethical, legal and social implications of incorporating personalized medicine into healthcare,” Brothers K. B. and Rothstein M. A. (2015) identify two issues that will bring significant ethical problems to healthcare. First, the increased amount of personal health information that will be shared, and second, the use of personalized medicine may add to the problem of disparity in healthcare. To receive personalized care, patients have to be completely open and allow providers to use of their health care information. Though they have the choice to restrict individual access, it does not guarantee that their privacy will not be violated. Health care facilities and providers make use of electronic health records (EHRs) to access patients’ information and facilitate information exchanges between other providers. While this process is highly adopted and helps expedite information, there is no guarantee the intended receiver receives the file exchanged. Additionally, this healthcare practice may also increase the risk of injury litigation. Paternalism is described as “a form of beneficence. People, believing that they know what is best for another, often make decisions that they believe are in that person’s best interest” (jblearning.com, n.d). On the other hand, cost and access to care are the top two that will worsen health disparity among different populations. The majority of uninsured individuals are among minority groups. The price of personalized medicine is quite steep, and even if this population had access to this care, it might not have the monetary resources to maintain the requirements of the treatment plan. Ethical Issues for Society Most patients are willing to try anything that will help save their lives. Using a personalized medicine approach gives individuals the comfort of knowing that this plan was set just for them. Involving patients in their health care treatment plan empowers them and encourages them to do better. However, for those who cannot afford such treatment or even get access to care, it is entirely unfair. The Affordable Care Act allowed many citizens to receive health insurance coverage, but many remain uninsured. Racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare continue to cost specific populations their lives, and these have been critical issues for decades. Ethical Issues for a Christian Healthcare Professional As Pozgar G. D. stated, “Religious beliefs and codes of conduct sometimes conflict with the ethical duty of caregivers to save lives” (p. 426). As Christians, do we deny care to an individual because of a lack of health insurance coverage? As challenging as it may be to ignore personal ethical viewpoints, professionals are expected to follow the ethical guidelines mise en place by their professions and organizations. These codes of ethics are designed to help face such challenging events in response to anticipated ethical conflicts (p. 427). Additionally, as healthcare professionals, medical ethics requires that we “do no harm” (p. 415). Should Christian participate in such Efforts Christians are continually put through the test. Should I follow my beliefs, or should I go by the guidelines set by my organization? Matthew 7:12 (New International Version), reminds us “In everything, do to others what you would want them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.” Often, we forget that we are all children of the Lord. Because some of us have access to the essential things in life, and others can merely take care of themselves, we tend to believe we are better and deserve it. However, dailyverse.com explains the verse above and states, it is a “guiding principle for Christians, and should influence our attitudes and motives as well as our seen and unseen actions, and it should be a life-principle that impacts every area of life and is exercised on all with whom we come in contact…” As Christians, we may sometimes be constricted by the code of ethics at work, but it should not be a barrier to providing care to those in need. In this instance, I would refer the individual to a community where help is available. To say “I am sorry, I cannot help you” is equivalent to admitting that we are incompetent. However, when conflicted by work ethics and ethical beliefs, we must ask ourselves, “what would benefit the patient the most?” Conclusion As the healthcare field is quickly evolving, health care professionals are faced with more challenges. A more sophisticated system calls for more ethical conflicts. While some issues will remain unsolved, others are in need to be addressed quickly. The racial and ethnic disparity in healthcare has been a crucial ethical problem. The thought that specific individuals belonging in a particular minority group are denied access to care solely based on their race or ethnic background is highly intolerable. Furthermore, care should be accessible to everyone who needs it. Ultimately, understanding why ethical guidelines were created will help make decision-making processes a lot less complicated and stressful. As Christian healthcare professionals, though it is hard to turn off our religious ethical beliefs, we must follow the organizational code of ethics and improve patient outcomes by doing no harm. References: Collins, F. S. The Language of God. [VitalSource Bookshelf]. Retrieved from https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/#/books/9780743293570/ (n.d.). Retrieved from https://openpage- ebooks.jblearning.com/wr/viewer.html?skipLastRead=true&oneTi mePasscode=ST3f0f70d9-5533-4077-8610-f474021de9aa#book/ad68e570-be00-4287-9b45591f5136147f/i37_Chapter15_01 Personalized Medicine. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.genome.gov/geneticsglossary/Personalized-Medicine Brothers, K. B., & Rothstein, M. A. (2015). Ethical, legal and social implications of incorporating personalized medicine into healthcare. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4296905/ What Does Matthew 7:12 Mean? (n.d.). Retrieved from https://dailyverse.knowingjesus.com/matthew-7-12 Classmate #2Everyday healthcare professionals have to make decisions. With every decision, an ensuing outcome takes place and becomes another learning opportunity for the professional. We would like to think that all decisions are easy and every outcome is one of joy and certainty, but this is not the case. Healthcare professionals, family, and caregivers all may be put in a situation where a choice must be made and the consequences of the choice may have a long term outcome that is one of pride or a decision made of regret. This is where ethics comes into play. According to Pozgar (2019), ethics is “the branch of philosophy that seeks to understand nature, purpose, justification, and the founding principles of moral rules and the systems they comprise.” Ethics shifts the focus of decision-making to good or bad, right or wrong, and considers motives and ends (Pozgar, 2019). Ethics surrounds the decision-making process of determining the ultimate actions involving what is the best decision and is the decision the “right” one. Ethics also encompasses how individuals choose to live, how individuals exist in harmony with the environment, and how individuals live with each other with so many living in poverty and others substantially wealthy (Pozgar, 2019). In the Healthcare industry, ethics is used for anticipating and acknowledging healthcare predicaments and making good discernments based on individual patient needs and wishes while maintaining values that work cordially with the laws that govern us while using the wisdom of Solomon to “do good” (Pozgar, 2019). There are many ethical dilemmas that are present in healthcare that so many support and just as many oppose. One of the biggest of these ethical dilemmas present today is that of cloning and stem cells. When put in the context of medicine, biotechnology and molecular biology, cloning defines the production of entities, individuals, and populations that are genetically identical or near identical with the original organism or part of an organism from which they are derived (Hayry, 2018). A stem cell is a cell that contains within it the ability to develop into several different types of cells (Collins, 2006). Within the bone marrow, stem cells have the capability of giving rise to red blood cells, white blood cells, bone cells, and given the proper circumstances, could potentially develop heart muscle cells (Collins, 2006). With stem cell research has risen the potential to develop new therapies. Many chronic diseases arise from the death of cells within a certain organ of the body (Collins, 2006). Regenerative medicine has since become a hot topic with the potential to regenerate these damaged tissues and organs to treat fatal chronic illnesses. Very few find fault with deriving stem cells from adults with no consequential health problems for the treatment of chronic disease. With this approach comes an “everyone wins” mindset. The desired scenario would be to derive adult stem cells and convince them to morph into the desired cell type to treat that person’s illness (Collins, 2006). The primary cause of controversy remains the study of embryonic stem cells.These stem cells have the potential to form any type of tissue under normal circumstances. But this is the part where profound ethical issues are raised. An embryo is formed by male sperm and female egg, a potential human life. Deriving the stem cells from the embryo generally results in the destruction of the embryo (Collins, 2006). With nearly every decision made, different people or groups have different outlooks. There are many supporters in society for cloning and stem cell research. This group argues that stem cell research is a possible medical breakthrough that could cure chronic illnesses, increase lifespan, and save healthcare spending in regards to research on other ideas and studies. This group disregards the fact of how or where the stem cells come from, and only focus on the final product. This group also has different viewpoints on when human rights are conceived. In the United States, the question of when human life begins and rights are conceived has been highly controversial and linked to debates on abortion (Bernard & Parham, 2009). From the standpoint of religious faith and moral conviction, it is believed that human life begins at conception, and therefore an embryo is a person due to the circumstances that embryos have the potential to become human beings. Many other people have a different view of the moral status of the embryo, for example that the embryo becomes a person in a moral sense at a later stage of development than fertilization or even birth (Bernard & Parham, 2009). Many others also hold a middle ground that the early embryo deserves special respect as a potential human being, but it is acceptable to use embryos for certain types of research with good justification. There are others that worry even if research on embryos is not wrong in itself, it will pave the path to a slippery slope of dehumanizing practices, such as embryo farms, cloned babies, the use of fetuses for spare parts, and the commodification of human life (Sandel, 2004). Society clashes at this debate year in and year out with no end in sight. As a Christian healthcare professional, it is becoming more and more difficult to hold to Godly standards with the healthcare field shifting more toward a scientific background. Pressure is put on healthcare workers to either conform to this shift, or stay true to Godly values which directly opposes stem cell research. Christian healthcare professionals have the choice of whether to accept the potential breakthrough benefits stem cell research has to offer at the expense of human embryos, or oppose this entirely and continue on the search for an alternative therapeutic intervention. In my opinion, as a Christian, we live to please God and worship our almighty creator. Galations 1:10 (ESV) states “For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.” This verse speaks dividends to Christians put in these ethical dilemmas. Am I living my life to please God, or am I living to be accepted by others? And in this case it should be an easy decision. God made us all in his image and hand carved each of us. The bible teaches us in Psalm 139: 13 and Jeremiah 1:5 that human existence begins at conception. These verses state how God knew us before conception and how he “knitted” us together in the womb (ESV). Because research on embryonic stem cells requires the destruction of a living human being, it is against God’s will. God states in Exodus 20:13 (ESV) that we shall not murder, and this is in direct opposition of God’s word. Bernard L., Parham, L. (2009) Ethical issues in stem cell research. Endocrine Reviews 30(3), 204213. https://doi.org/10.1210/er.2008-0031 Collins, F. (2006). The language of God: A scientist presents evidence for belief. New York, NY: Free Press. ISBN: 9781416542742 Hayry, M. (2018). Ethics and cloning. British Medical Bulletin., 128(1), 15– 21. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldy031 Pozgar, G.(2019). NVPMD: Legal aspects of health care administration. 13E-Liberty Custom. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett. ISBN: 9781284170931. (3), 207-209. doi:10.1056/NEJMp048145 The New England Journal of Medicine, 351 Sandel, M. (2004). Embryo ethics — the moral logic of stem-cell research. The New England Journal of Medicine, 351(3), 207-209. doi:10.1056/NEJMp048145 DISCUSSION BOARD FORUM REPLIES GRADING RUBRIC Identify the points of difference in your analyses and explain how your sources and analysis led you to your conclusion. Please complete 2 replies of at least 450 words each to 2 classmates’ threads. Each reply must reference at least 3 scholarly sources other than the course textbook and citations must follow current APA format (including both in-text citations and a reference list). You must also support each with thoughtful analysis (considering assumptions, analyzing implications, and comparing/contrasting concepts and include thorough biblical worldview integration. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Content Key Components Advanced 10 points Contribution made to discussion with each reply (2) expounding on the thread. Replies - Levels of Achievement Proficient Developing 8 – 9 points Marginal contribution made to discussion with each reply (2) marginally expounding on the thread. 1 – 7 points Minimal contribution (2 minimal or only 1 reply) made to discussion with each reply minimally expounding on the thread. Not present Points Earned 0 points No contribution made to discussion. Page 1 of 3 Major Point Support 23 – 25 points 21 – 22 points 1 to 20 points 0 points Major points are supported by all of the following: • Reading & Study materials; • Pertinent, conceptual, or personal examples; • Thoughtful analysis (considering assumptions, analyzing implications, and comparing/contrasting concepts); and • At least 3 scholarly source citations, in addition to the course textbook, in current APA format. • Integration of at least 1 biblical principle with citations. Major points are supported by most of the following: • Reading & Study materials; • Pertinent, conceptual, or personal examples; • Thoughtful analysis (considering assumptions, analyzing implications, and comparing/contrasting concepts); and • At least 3 scholarly source citations, in addition to the course textbook, in current APA format. • Integration of at least 1 biblical principles with citation. Major points are supported by some of the following: • Reading & Study materials; • Pertinent, conceptual, or personal examples; • Thoughtful analysis (considering assumptions, analyzing implications, and comparing/contrasting concepts); and • At least 3 scholarly source citations, in addition to the course textbook, in current APA format. • Integration of at least 1 biblical principle with citations. Major points are supported by none of the following: • Reading & Study materials; • Pertinent, conceptual, or personal examples; • Thoughtful analysis (considering assumptions, analyzing implications, and comparing/contrasting concepts); and • At least 3 scholarly source citations, in addition to the course textbook, in current APA format. • Integration of at least 1 biblical principle with citations. Replies - Levels of Achievement Proficient Developing Structure Advanced Grammar/ Spelling 6 points 4 – 5 points Correct spelling and grammar are used throughout the replies. There are 0–2 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. There are 3–5 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. 1 – 3 points There are 6–10 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content. Not present Points Earned 0 points There are more than 10 errors in the grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content OR there is evidence of a complete lack of spellchecking and proofreading. Page 2 of 3 APA Citation Compliance Word Count 6 points References are cited both in-text and in reference lists. There are 0–2 minor errors in APA format in the required citations. 3 points The minimum word count of 450 words of substantive content is met or exceeded in each of two replies. 4 – 5 points 1 – 3 points References are cited both in-text and in reference lists. There are 3-5 minor errors in APA format in the required citations. There are more than 5 errors in APA format in the required citations and/or required citations are missing. 2 points 1 point Substantive word count is between 300 and 450 words in one or both of two replies. Substantive word count is between 200 and 300 words in one or both of two replies. 0 points Required citations do not exist, or demonstrate no APA formatting or structure. 0 points There are fewer than 200 words of substantive content in one or both of two replies, including one or both replies not posted. Page 3 of 3 Running Head: CHRISTIAN ETHICS 1 Discussion board 2 CHRISTIAN ETHICS The medical field is one of the areas that keep experiencing more changes that are aimed at improving the quality of services that are offered to the patients. The development of modern means of providing health services is, in most cases, influential in ensuring that the various health issues facing the general community are well addressed. Howev ... Purchase answer to see full attachment