Module 3 Case Study Postings

Standard English usage and college level compositional standards are assumed for full credit. A composite grade will be submitted for all three postings, with the original posting carrying the same weight as both of the responses.

Deductions for not meeting word minimums will be pro-rated proportionately. Answers receiving full credit may vary widely in their conclusions, but will nonetheless meet the following criteria: (a) display an accurate knowledge of ethical theory and (b) provide a coherent and adequately supported argument. The unacknowledged and/or inappropriate use of sources will be considered as plagiarism, resulting in a score of zero for this assignment, as well as other serious consequences outlined in the syllabus.

Part A:

Read the conference questions below and write an original response to each of the two questions. Your response to each question should be a minimum of 250 words in length in order to be eligible for full credit.

Read:

Revisiting Nurse Rivers (Attached) 

Then answer the two following questions:

• What ethical principles did Eunice Rivers attempt to uphold in her long nursing practice? Explain your answer.
• Ought she to share part of the blame for the reprehensible research project that involved withholding both accurate information and appropriate treatment? Explain your answer.

Post each of your responses to the group weekly conference.

• Post your responses to a single conference thread.
• Use the following naming convention in the subject line of the conference thread for your posting: First name, Last name (ex. John Smith)