Case Study 4: Sterilizing the Developmentally Delayed Patient
Case Study Assignments (45 points each)
Mary Ellen Thompson, a skilled maternal-child nurse, has recently been employed by a public hospital in a large southwestern city. Because she speaks fluent Spanish, she has been asked to serve as a translator for the scheduled C-section of a 14-year-old, mildly developmentally delayed, Hispanic teenager. The patient undergoes epidural anesthesia without incident and delivers a small but healthy 6 lb. 4 oz. baby girl. While completing the C-section, Mrs. Thompson suddenly realizes that the surgeon is going to perform a tubal ligation. Checking the patient’s chart, Mrs. Thompson does not find any specific consent for the tubal ligation and asks the physician if the procedure was anticipated and whether the patient was informed of its possibility. The physician tells Mrs. Thompson that he believes the procedure is “medically necessary” and that he will record it as such in his operative report.
Several days later, Mrs. Thompson visits the patient and her parents. The parents are concerned about their daughter’s ability to care for her child, but they have made a commitment to shoulder the responsibility for both the mother and the child. In talking to them, Mrs. Thompson realizes that they have no awareness that a tubal ligation was performed on their daughter. They are economically indigent and poorly educated, yet Mrs. Thompson does not think that these circumstances warrant the involuntary sterilization of a mildly developmentally delayed individual without parental consent. What should she do?
If you were Mrs. Thompson, which of the following actions would you consider and why (respond to all that apply)?
1. Speak to the physician and ask him to inform the girl and her mother of what had happened.
2. Speak to nursing staff about taking collective action against the physician.
3. Report to administrators that a surgical procedure was done without adequate consent.
4. Ask not to be assigned to work with that physician again.
5. Explain to the mother what took place.
6. Speak to a public advocacy group about the ethical issue of sterilization without consent.
NM410 Unit 5 Week 10 Assignment: Case Study 4 Rubric
|
NM410 Unit 5 Week 10 Assignment: Case Study 4 Rubric
|
|
Criteria
|
Ratings
|
Pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
|
|
15 pts
5
Demonstrates the ability to construct a clear and insightful problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of all relevant contextual factors.
|
13.5 pts
4
Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement, thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, and problem statement is adequately detailed.
|
12 pts
3
Begins to demonstrate the ability to construct a problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, but problem statement is superficial.
|
10.5 pts
2
Demonstrates a limited ability in identifying a problem statement/thesis statement/topic statement or related contextual factors.
|
9 pts
1
Demonstrates the ability to explain contextual facts but does not provide a defined statement.
|
0 pts
0
There is no evidence of a defined statement.
|
|
15 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysis
|
|
15 pts
5
Organizes and compares evidence to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.
|
13.5 pts
4
Organizes and interprets evidence to reveal patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.
|
12 pts
3
Organizes and describes evidence according to patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus.
|
10.5 pts
2
Organizes evidence, but the organization is not effective in revealing patterns, differences, or similarities.
|
9 pts
1
Describes evidence, but it is not organized and/ or is unrelated to focus.
|
0 pts
0
Lists evidence, but it is not organized and/ or is unrelated to focus.
|
|
15 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting
|
|
10 pts
5
The paper exhibits a excellent command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling.
|
9 pts
4
The paper exhibits a good command of written English language conventions. The paper has no errors in mechanics, or spelling with minor grammatical errors that impair the flow of communication.
|
8 pts
3
The paper exhibits a basic command of written English language conventions. The paper has minor errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impact the flow of communication.
|
7 pts
2
The paper exhibits a limited command of written English language conventions. The paper has frequent errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that impede the flow of communication.
|
6 pts
1
The paper exhibits little command of written English language conventions. The paper has errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader to stop and reread parts of the writing to discern meaning.
|
0 pts
0
The paper does not demonstrate command of written English language conventions. The paper has multiple errors in mechanics, grammar, or spelling that cause the reader difficulty discerning the meaning.
|
|
10 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA
|
|
5 pts
5
The required APA elements are all included with correct formatting, including in-text citations and references.
|
4.5 pts
4
The required APA elements are all included with minor formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.
|
4 pts
3
The required APA elements are all included with multiple formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.
|
3.5 pts
2
The required APA elements are not all included. AND/OR there are major formatting errors, including in-text citations and references.
|
3 pts
1
Several APA elements are missing. The errors in formatting demonstrate limited understanding of APA guidelines, in-text-citations, and references.
|
0 pts
0
There is little to no evidence of APA formatting. AND/OR there are no in-text citations AND/OR references.
|
|
5 pts
|
Klubo
NM410CaseStudy4.docx
