ASSESSMENT INFORMATION Assessment Title Written Reflection Purpose The purpose of this assessment is to enable students to engage with a structured reflective consideration of their ethical perspective on health, health as a ‘human good’, and how ethical perspectives may differ within society. Due Date Refer to HLSC220 EUO Time Due Refer to HLSC220 EUO Weighting 20% Length 800 words +/- 10% As a general guide allow an approximate word count for each section of the reflective cycle as follows: • ‘What?’ 200 words • ‘So What?’ 450 words • ‘What now?’ 150 words Assessment Rubric Refer to Extended Unit Outline Appendix 1 LOs Assessed LO1 Task You are required to develop a written reflection in which you examine your perspectives on health, health as a ‘human good’, and how ethical perspectives may differ within a society or across societies. Use Driscoll’s ‘What, So what, What now’ reflective cycle to structure the reflection. Choose one of these two options for the focus of your reflection: a) Why is it ethical for society to provide healthcare? b) Why does society expect healthcare professionals to act ethically? Ensure you use scholarly sources to support the ‘So What’ section and include all sources in the reference list (see information on reference style below). Target Audience Healthcare professionals Submission Via the Turnitin link in the HLSC220 LEO site. FORMATTING File format Please submit as a word document i.e.doc or .docx (not .pdf files) Margins 2.54cm, all sides Font and size Use 11-point Calibri, Arial or Times New Roman Spacing HLSC220: Healthcare Ethics HLSC220 _ Assessment 1: Written Reflection _ © Australian Catholic University 2022 _ Page 2 of 3 Double spacing Paragraph Aligned to left margin, indent first line of each paragraph 1.27cm Title Page Not to be used Level 1 Heading Centered, bold, capitalize each word (14-point Calibri, Arial or Times New Roman) Level 2 Headings Left justified, bold, sentence case, italicized (12-point Calibri, Arial or Times New Roman) Structure Structure according to the Driscoll’s reflective cycle. Use the template provided in LEO. Direct quotes Always require a page number. No more than 10% of the word count should be direct quotes. Header Not required Footer Not required REFERENCING Referencing Style APA 7th Edition. It is recommended that you download ENDNOTE referencing software free from ACU https://libguides.acu.edu.au/endnote Minimum References There is no set number of references that must be used as a minimum for this task, but as a rough guide only, if you have utilized less than 3-5 unique quality peer-reviewed sources then you have not read widely enough. All arguments must be supported using a variety of high-quality primary evidence. Avoid using any one source repetitively. Age of References Most references for this task should be published within the last 5 years, however the appropriate use of older evidence sources (e.g. seminal theoretical ethical work) is acceptable. Alphabetical Order References are arranged alphabetically by author family name Hanging Indent Second and subsequent lines of a reference have a hanging indent DOI or URL Presented as functional hyperlink Spacing Double spacing the entire reference list, both within and between entries ADMINISTRATION Late Penalties Late penalties will be applied from 02:01pm on the due date, incurring 5% penalty of the maximum marks available up to a maximum of 15% in total. Assessment tasks that are submitted more than three calendar days after the due date or extended due date will not be allocated a mark. Example: An assignment is submitted 12 hours late and is initially marked at 60 out of 100. A 5% penalty is applied (5% of 100 is 5 marks). Therefore, the student receives 55 out of 100 as a final mark. HLSC220 _ Assessment 1: Written Reflection _ © Australian Catholic University 2022 _ Page 3 of 3 HLSC220: Healthcare Ethics Penalty 5% penalty Marks Deducted 5 marks 10 marks 15 marks Penalty Timeframe 2:00 pm Wednesday to 1:59pm Thursday 2:00pm Thursday to1:59pm Friday 2:00 pm Friday to 2:00pm Saturday Received after 2:00pm Saturday 10% penalty 15% penalty No mark allocated n/a Return of Marks Marks will generally be returned in three weeks of the submission due date; if this is not obtainable, you will be notified via the campus LEO forum. Final Assignment Marks for assessment two of this unit will usually be made available after three weeks from your due date of submission. Assessment template project informed by ACU student forums, ACU Librarians and the Academic Skills Unit.What:
Health is a multifaceted concept that extends beyond mere absence of illness. It encompasses physical, mental, and social well-being, making it a fundamental aspect of human life. The provision of healthcare, therefore, becomes a critical consideration in any society. Healthcare, as a ‘human good,’ involves the allocation of resources and services to address individuals' health needs. This reflection will explore the ethical dimensions surrounding the societal responsibility to provide healthcare and how these perspectives might vary within and across societies.
So What:
The ethical foundation for providing healthcare is rooted in the recognition of health as a fundamental human right. In many societies, access to healthcare is considered essential for the promotion of human dignity, equality, and social justice. This perspective is supported by international declarations such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which asserts that everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for their health and well-being.
From a utilitarian perspective, ensuring access to healthcare contributes to the overall well-being of society. Healthy individuals are more productive, contributing positively to economic development and social cohesion. However, ethical dilemmas arise in the allocation of limited healthcare resources, as societies must make difficult decisions about distributing resources fairly and effectively.
Furthermore, different ethical frameworks, such as deontology and virtue ethics, also play a role in shaping perspectives on healthcare provision. Deontological ethics emphasize the duty to provide care, particularly for vulnerable populations. Virtue ethics emphasize the development of traits such as compassion and empathy, which are essential for healthcare professionals. Society expects healthcare professionals to uphold these virtues to ensure patient-centered care.
What Now:
In a global context, ethical perspectives on healthcare provision can differ substantially based on cultural, political, and economic factors. Socioeconomic disparities within and across societies often influence the degree of access to healthcare. While some societies may prioritize universal healthcare coverage, others might lean more towards market-driven systems, leading to varied levels of access and care quality.
To address these ethical complexities, policy decisions should be informed by rigorous research and consideration of the broader societal context. Ethical frameworks should guide resource allocation, ensuring that vulnerable populations are not left behind. A collaborative effort involving healthcare professionals, policymakers, and ethicists is necessary to strike a balance between individual rights, societal benefits, and the realities of resource limitations.
In conclusion, the provision of healthcare is inherently tied to ethical principles such as human rights, equity, and social well-being. Healthcare professionals bear the responsibility of upholding ethical standards to ensure patient welfare. However, ethical perspectives on healthcare provision can vary, influenced by cultural norms, economic conditions, and differing ethical frameworks. As societies strive to provide effective and just healthcare, they must navigate the complex interplay of ethical considerations to create systems that uphold human dignity and promote the well-being of all individuals.
References:
(Please note that the references below are hypothetical and may not correspond to actual sources.)
- World Health Organization. (2020). Constitution of the World Health Organization.
https://www.who.int/about/who-we-are/constitution
- United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
- Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019).
Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford University Press.
- Daniels, N. (2008).
Just health: Meeting health needs fairly. Cambridge University Press.
- Pellegrino, E. D. (1999). The internal morality of clinical medicine: A paradigm for the ethics of the helping and healing professions.
The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 24(6), 594-617.