Category: Nursing

The DNP project provides you with the opportunity for in-depth analysis, synthesis, and application of a chosen topic that contributes to an area of scholarship in advanced nursing practice. In this course, the student will implement the DNP project in the practice setting with oversight provided by the DNP Faculty Mentor, faculty second reader, and practice facilitator. This course requires 120 supervised practice hours, which may be applied to the doctoral project.

Quarter Credit Hours: 6 | Prerequisite: 
DN803

In this course, you will appraise systematic experiential, contextual, and best evidence-based practice, and the use of information technology and data to design the DNP Project. In-depth work with experts from nursing and other disciplines will be incorporated to offer opportunities for meaningful student engagement and networking in the health care environment. You will acquire the skills and knowledge essential to process and manage information systems/technology resources in a variety of health care settings. Through assignments and discussions, you will retrieve and critically analyze digital data essential to health care quality improvement. Informatics tools for data extraction, organization, and interpretation will be compared. This course requires 120 supervised practice hours which may be applied to the doctoral project.

Quarter Credit Hours: 6 | Prerequisite: 
DN753

This course provides you with evidence-based organizational and leadership knowledge and skills necessary to appraise practice leadership theories and organizational models. The influence of economics, health policy, stakeholders, information technology, and interprofessional collaboration upon health care organizational operations will be explored. You will identify a practice leadership model that aligns with the DNP project focus. This course requires 50 supervised practice hours, which may be applied to the doctoral project.

Quarter Credit Hours: 5 | Prerequisite: 
DN733
 | Corequisite:
 DN743

In this course, students will analyze current and emerging aggregate-level clinical prevention and population health issues. Students will demonstrate and apply experiential, contextual, and evidence-based best practices, cost/benefits, and systematic plans for quality improvement benchmarks with the end goal of designing aggregate-level clinical prevention and population health interventions. This course requires 50 supervised practice hours, which may be applied to the doctoral project.

Quarter Credit Hours: 5 | Prerequisite: 
DN733

This course will prepare you to design and implement culturally proficient health care policies with special consideration of issues of social justice and equity. Legal and ethical challenges encountered in practice leadership, decision making, and the implementation of systems and organizational change processes and policies will be explored. Ethics, health care policy, and advocacy specific to a DNP project will be emphasized. This course requires 50 supervised practice hours, which may be applied to the doctoral project.

Quarter Credit Hours: 5 | Prerequisite: 
DN703 
| Corequisite: 
DN723

The Ethical Theory of Principlism in Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative Context: A Case Study

Introduction

The ethical theory of Principlism introduced by Beauchamp and Childress in the
Principles of Biomedical Ethics
is also sometimes referred to as the “Georgetown Approach.” It comprises of four main principles namely respect for (patient) autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and fairness or justice. Nonmaleficence refers to the act of healthcare workers not intentionally causing harm to their patients, while beneficence calls for healthcare workers to always work and do everything for the benefit of the patient (Encyclopedia.com, 2016; Page, 2012; McCarthy, 2003). The four major ethical principles above happen to be common to almost all the available ethical theories, aside from Principlism. They strive to harmonize ethical principles with socio-cultural and religious beliefs (Advanced Practice Toolkit, 2018).

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

The principle of respect for autonomy dictates that the healthcare professional should respect the decision of care taken by a mentally competent and adult patient or relative of patient. The professional must not object to the decision even if it appears unsound and irrational. This means no healthcare professional has the moral authority to overrule the decision taken by a mentally sound patient or a competent relative concerning their care. Moreover, they must also first obtain consent for any procedure on the patient after thorough explanation of consequences (Encyclopedia.com, 2016; McCarthy, 2003). The ethical principle of fairness or justice on its part dictates that the health professional and the health institution have a distributive and criminal responsibility in so far as the patient’s condition and conduct are concerned. This is in relation to the patient’s condition and its interaction with other members of the society. Resources must be shared fairly (like available organs for transplantation), and matters like a patient intentionally attempting to infect another with a deadly disease (a criminal act) must be reported by the health worker to the relevant authorities (Encyclopedia.com, 2016; McCarthy, 2003).

Applying the Four Principles: Case Study Part 1 (Chart)

Medical Indications

Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

Patient Preferences

Autonomy

Beneficence dictates that the physician do the best for James who now has kidney failure and not allow harm to befall him (nonmaleficence). Hence the decision to put him on immediate dialysis. Also, the suggestion by the physician to consider Samuel as a potential donor after failure to get a suitable one is an act of beneficence. However, the physician must also assess the potential risks to Samuel in donating a kidney to James, as required by the principle of nonmaleficence (Encyclopedia.com, 2016; Page, 2012; McCarthy, 2003).

The principle of autonomy states that Mike and Joanne as the parents of the minors have the last say in deciding what happens to them. It is them who must not only agree to the physician’s suggestions, but also give informed consent for any procedure (including dialysis) to be done. It is for this reason that Mike and Joanne’s decision to forego dialysis for James and take him to a faith healing crusade has to be respected by the physician. Additionally, the suggestion by the physician that Samuel be the organ donor to his twin brother is subject to approval and consent by both parents; as required by respect for autonomy (Encyclopedia.com, 2016; McCarthy, 2003). This means that the decision as to whether James will get one kidney from his brother or wait for God to perform his miracle on him is the parents’.

Quality of Life

Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, Autonomy

Contextual Features

Justice and Fairness

To save James (nonmaleficence) and improve his quality of life (beneficence) the physician has suggested immediate dialysis. However, the parents must first give their consent for that to happen (autonomy). This is the same case with the suggestion of transplantation by the physician.

The principle of justice and fairness requires that the physician and the health institution consider James with priority in the list of those waiting for transplantation based on the urgency of the situation.

 

Applying the Four Principles: Case Study Part 2 (Evaluation)

From a Christian standpoint, of the four ethical principles of Principlism the most pressing one in this case study is nonmaleficence. As stated above, this is the principle that states that no harm should be brought upon the patient by the actions of those taking care of him (Encyclopedia.com, 2016; McCarthy, 2003). This is consistent with a study that was conducted by Page (2012). In the survey conducted by the use of a questionnaire, it was found that student healthcare workers actually ranked nonmaleficence highest among the four principles. Conversely, they ranked beneficence or “truth-telling” as the least important (Page, 2012). Arguably, this is also the same factor that is motivating the religious parents of James and Samuel.  As such, their refusal to immediately allow James to undergo dialysis and opt for faith healing is informed partly by fear that the procedure (dialysis) might also harm James. Equally, the parents’ reluctance to buy into the idea that Samuel donates one of his kidneys to James is also a result of fear that Samuel may remain in a precarious health situation after donating his kidney. In all this, the general Christian view therefore is that God cannot allow harm to befall any of his creation.

From a Christian point of view, again, a Christian person might rank the four principles in order of priority from the highest to the lowest as follows: nonmaleficence, beneficence, justice, and autonomy. As explained above, a Christian will most likely view nonmaleficence as the most important of the four. This is because it is very unChristian to want to cause harm to another human being. Beneficence should come second for the simple reason that it is the opposite of nonmaleficence. Beneficence is the act of doing good to the other person and carrying out all activities with the intention of ultimate benefit to them, in the context of a patient and care giver (Encyclopedia.com, 2016; Page, 2012; McCarthy, 2003). For a Christian person, the act of not intending to do harm to the patient (nonmaleficence) is automatically supported by a need and wish to do what benefits the patient (beneficence). The third principle from the top in this hierarchy would be justice. For a Christian, after refusing to harm their “neighbor” and deciding to only do what benefits the said “neighbor,” the next thing they would want for this person is nothing but justice and fairness. He would want this person to be treated justly and fairly in terms of not only sharing available resources, but also preventing harm to them by those with criminal intent for instance. Lastly and at the bottom of the list would be respect for autonomy of decision by the patient or relatives.

Conclusion

The biomedical ethical theory of Principlism with its four principles of respect for autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice closely conforms to and agrees with common socio-cultural and religious preferences and beliefs. This makes it better placed to be a reference point in ethical decision-making in clinical practice.

References

Advanced Practice Toolkit (1 May 2018).
Ethical Principles
. Retrieved from
https://www.advancedpractice.scot.nhs.uk/law-ethics/ethics/ethical-principles.aspx

Encyclopedia.com (2016).
Principlism
. Retrieved from
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/principlism

McCarthy, J. (2003). Principlism or narrative ethics: Must we choose between them?
Journal of Med Ethics; Medical Humanities
, 29(2), 65-71. Doi: 10.1136/mh.29.2.65

Page, K. (2012). The four principles: Can they be measured and do they predict ethical decision making?
BMC Medical Ethics
, 13(10). Doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-13-10

You will analyze methods and tools for critical appraisal and application of empirical, reflective, and practice-based information to improve the quality of care and outcomes for specific populations. You will analyze and appraise an identified issue within the population, such as outcomes of practice, practice patterns, policies, or organizational systems of care. The application of evidence-based practice is emphasized for designing and implementing an intervention to influence an identified issue. Methods for evaluating outcomes of the proposed intervention will be explored. You will develop and defend a proposal for a DNP project in this course. This course requires 80 supervised practice hours, which may be applied to the doctoral project.

Quarter Credit Hours: 5 | Prerequisite: 
DN713

Based on ”Case Study: Fetal Abnormality” and other required topic study materials, write a 750-1,000-word reflection that answers the following questions:

What is the Christian view of the nature of human persons, and which theory of moral status is it compatible with? How is this related to the intrinsic human value and dignity?

Which theory or theories are being used by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson to determine the moral status of the fetus? What from the case study specifically leads you to believe that they hold the theory you selected?

How does the theory determine or influence each of their recommendations for action?

What theory do you agree with? Why? How would that theory determine or influence the recommendation for action?

Remember to support your responses with the topic study materials.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

Case Study: Fetal Abnormality

Jessica is a 30-year-old immigrant from Mexico City. She and her husband Marco have been in the United States for the last three years and have finally earned enough money to move out of their Aunt Maria’s home and into an apartment of their own. They are both hard workers. Jessica works 50 hours a week at a local restaurant and Marco has been contracting side jobs in construction. Six months before their move to an apartment, Jessica finds out she is pregnant.

Four months later, Jessica and Marco arrive at the county hospital, a large, public, nonteaching hospital. A preliminary ultrasound indicates a possible abnormality with the fetus. Further scans are conducted, and it is determined that the fetus has a rare condition in which it has not developed any arms and will not likely develop them. There is also a 25% chance that the fetus may have Down syndrome.

Dr. Wilson, the primary attending physician, is seeing Jessica for the first time, since she and Marco did not receive earlier prenatal care over concerns about finances. Marco insists that Dr. Wilson refrain from telling Jessica the scan results, assuring him that he will tell his wife himself when she is emotionally ready for the news. While Marco and Dr. Wilson are talking in another room, Aunt Maria walks into the room with a distressed look on her face. She can tell that something is wrong and inquires of Dr. Wilson. After hearing of the diagnosis, she walks out of the room wailing loudly and praying aloud.

Marco and Dr. Wilson continue their discussion, and Dr. Wilson insists that he has an obligation to Jessica as his patient and that she has a right to know the diagnosis of the fetus. He furthermore is intent on discussing all relevant factors and options regarding the next step, including abortion. Marco insists on taking some time to think of how to break the news to Jessica, but Dr. Wilson, frustrated with the direction of the conversation, informs the husband that such a choice is not his to make. Dr. Wilson proceeds back across the hall, where he walks in on Aunt Maria awkwardly praying with Jessica and phoning the priest. At that point, Dr. Wilson gently but briefly informs Jessica of the diagnosis and lays out the option for abortion as a responsible medical alternative, given the quality of life such a child would have. Jessica looks at him and struggles to hold back her tears.

Jessica is torn between her hopes of a better socioeconomic position and increased independence, along with her conviction that all life is sacred. Marco will support Jessica in whatever decision she makes but is finding it difficult not to view the pregnancy and the prospects of a disabled child as a burden and a barrier to their economic security and plans. Dr. Wilson lays out all of the options but clearly makes his view known that abortion is “scientifically” and medically a wise choice in this situation. Aunt Maria pleads with Jessica to follow through with the pregnancy and allow what “God intends” to take place and urges Jessica to think of her responsibility as a mother.

The Question of Moral Status: A Case of Fetal Abnormality and the Dilemma of Abortion versus Religious Beliefs

Introduction

Moral status is the employment of ethical principles in the consideration of the importance of living things and their value, in as far as life is concerned (Gray, 2019). In an examination of the theories of moral status, some theorists clearly believe that life is equal regardless of the living thing under consideration, while others believe it is not. These theories have placed some sort of hierarchy or levels of consideration for moral standing. For example, Tauer (2001) quotes Warren in her1997 book
Moral Status
as considering all living things to be having the same moral standing (status). This is from human beings with complete full moral status (FMS) to the least significant single-celled organisms. This paper examines in this context the matter of a deformed fetus that is also likely to have cognitive deficiencies if carried to term.

The Christian View

The Christian view of the nature of human persons is that human beings right from conception are entitled to full moral status just by virtue of being a human being, all other considerations (like cognition status) notwithstanding (Gray, 2019; Studocu.com, n.d.). This view is compatible with the theory of moral status that is based on human properties (Studocu.com, n.d.). This is the religious or philosophical theory (Gray, 2019). The theory states that it is only human beings that possess moral status among all the other living things. All the others, including plants and animals, were created to serve the interests of the human being. It goes on to elaborate that the human person acquires this full moral status the moment that they are conceived in the womb. Thus according to this Christian and philosophical theory based on human properties, the status of a fetus and that of a grown complete human person with all cognitive functions intact is the same in as far as full moral status is concerned (Gray, 2019; Studocu.com, n.d.). This is related to the intrinsic human value and dignity in that the only characteristic for FMS is the fact of becoming a human being (at conception). What this implies is that this quality is innate or intrinsic, and human beings are conceived with it. In other words, human life is sacred right from conception.

The Theories Exhibited by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson in the Case Study

This case study involves a fetus that will not only be born with a deformity (lack of limbs), but also a 1 in 4 probability of having Down syndrome. This means that there is a high likelihood that the child will also be mentally challenged with cognitive (learning and thinking) deficiencies. From the case scenario, therefore, Jessica and Aunt Maria clearly subscribe to the religious/ philosophical theory of moral status based on human properties. As such, to them a human being possesses full moral status right from conception, regardless of their physical and mental deficiencies (Gray, 2019; Studocu.com, n.d.). Despite being concious of the reality of her precarious socio-economic status into which a mentally and physically challenged infant would impose further strain, Jessica still believes that “all life is sacred.” She therefore does not agree with Dr. Wilson’s view that aborting the baby is the best option. As for Aunt Maria, she is clearly religious and would not entertain any thought of terminating any life, whether already born or intra-uterine. She is clearly of the same theory as Jessica, which says that based on (intrinsic) human properties (of full moral status) all human life from conception is sacred. She characteristically therefore advises Jessica, despite the overwhelming medical evidence, to carry the pregnancy to term and play her role “as a mother.” Dr. Wilson on his part clearly subscribes to the moral status theory based on cognitive properties (Studocu.com, n.d.). Other authorities refer to this theory as the Kantian theory of moral status after Emmanuel Kant (Gray, 2019).  This particular theory of moral status holds that a living thing (human being) is only entitled to full moral status if they possess and can demonstrate “awareness, memory, understanding, and thinking.” This is capacity for cognition. Clearly, this being still a fetus it does not satisfy this criterion and hence it does not possess any moral status. But most importantly, the Kantian theory avers that this is essentially an “all-or-nothing position” (Gray, 2019). That is one either has cognitive ability or not, for possession of moral status. This fetus, from the medical tests, will certainly likely not have this cognitive capacity even if it s let to be born and grow (because of the possibility of Down syndrome). Dr. Wilson additionally belongs to the school of thought of the moral status theory based on relationships. He has a doctor-patient obligation which in this case does not confer moral status to Jessica’s unborn child (Studocu.com, n.d.). Finally, Marco – although apparently ambivalent – belongs also to the moral status theory of Kant that is based on cognitive properties. He “find[s] it difficult [that] the pregnancy and the … disabled child [will be] a burden and a barrier to their economic security and plans.” As such the fetus has no moral status because of the physical and possible cognitive disability.

My Position

I take the view that moral status in this case should be decided solely based on the theory of Kant or cognitive properties. The fetus either has cognitive potential (now) or cognitive ability (later) or not. This is what will confer moral status on it. I take this position as it will be in the best interest of the child to be aborted as a fetus rather than being born only to suffer the rest of their life. In fact, the moral status theory of sentience is in support of this (pain and suffering should not be caused to a living thing) (Studocu.com, n.d.). As the case study presents, however, the fetus has a significant likelihood of being born with Down syndrome-induced cognitive deficiency which they’ll carry for life. My theory position will thus influence recommendation for action in that letting the fetus live will be tantamount to condemning it to a lifetime of misery and suffering because of its physical and cognitive deficiencies.

 

References

Gray, K. (2019). Moral status: Definition, philosophy, and criteria. Retrieved from
https://study.com/academy/lesson/moral-status-definition-philosophy-criteria.html

Studocu.com (n.d.). Theories of moral status. Retrieved from
https://www.studocu.com/en/document/oakland-university/biomedicine-and-disease/lecture-notes/theories-of-moral-status/1044276/view

Tauer, C.A. (2001). Review: The types of moral status.
The Hastings Centre Report
, 31(1), p. 45. Doi: 10.2307/3528734

DN713: Epidemiology and Social Determinants of Population Health

ORDER A CUSTOM-WRITTEN, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER NOW

This course focuses on comprehending, synthesizing, and applying emerging scientific knowledge specific to clinical prevention and population health. You will synthesize trends among epidemiologic, biostatistical, and environmental data to derive solutions to tenacious or new health care problems based on existing health data sets and the scientific literature. Social determinants of health in the processes of conducting risk assessment, intervention development and implementation, health care delivery planning, and evaluation will be considered. Models of clinical prevention and population health care delivery will be evaluated. This course requires 20 supervised practice hours focused on population health. DN713: Epidemiology and Social Determinants of Population Health

Quarter Credit Hours: 5 | Prerequisite: None | Corequisite:
 DN703

Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example

Based on the required topic study materials, write a reflection about worldview and respond to following:

In 250-300 words, explain the Christian perspective of the nature of spirituality and ethics in contrast to the perspective of postmodern relativism within health care.

In 250-300 words, explain what scientism is and describe two of the main arguments against it.

In 750-1,000 words, answer each of the worldview questions according to your own personal perspective and worldview: (a) What is ultimate reality? (b) What is the nature of the universe? (c) What is a human being? (d) What is knowledge? (e) What is your basis of ethics? (f) What is the purpose of your existence?

Remember to support your reflection with the topic study materials. Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example.

ORDER A CUSTOM-WRITTEN, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER NOW

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example.

Worldview analysis and personal inventory

Part 1.

Christians view spirituality as the prism of religion and theology in which an all-powerful God exists that has control over everything. In fact, the spirituality is a reflection of the Christian quest for purpose, meaning and truth in life, seeking to introduce a transcendental perspective to the human experience. This implies that spirituality serves both a symbolic and theological function. In addition, Christians view ethics as conformity with the dictates of spirituality especially when there is no ambiguity over expectations. The Christian perspective of spirituality and ethics has implications for health care through evaluating it as practiced ethics since it seeks to lessen human suffering from disease with restoring and augmenting wellbeing (Igboin, 2015). Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example.

Postmodern relativism is based on the notion that there is no absolute truth. It acknowledges that although there are those who subscribe to spirituality and believe that human life has transcendental implications, it would be wrong to disparage the belief that human life does not have transcendental implications. In essence, postmodern relativism accepts that all contrasting ideas are equally valid and should not be discarded simply because they are contradictory. Concerning ethics, postmodern relativism considers it as a truth that changes based on the circumstances. That is because what is unethical for one group will similarly be unethical for another group. This has implication for health care since it forces medical personnel to be more cognizant of what the patients want. For instance, medical personnel could consider assisted suicide as ethically right, particularly in palliative care, while a group of patients could consider it as unethical (Zavada, 2019). Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example.

Part 2.

Scientism is the view that hard sciences that can provide factual and testable data that can be replicated (such as astronomy, physics, biology and chemistry) are the only source of genuine and true knowledge about reality. In fact, it notes that although soft sciences offers some knowledge about reality, only hard sciences can offer superior knowledge. That is because hard science is based on falsification, experimentation and skepticism in the search for basic explanatory principles about world reality. In addition, soft sciences (such as religion, ethics and philosophy) are only partially acceptable on the basis of their inherent subjective nature and are considered as private issues of personal opinion. This implies that any claims that accept knowledge from soft sciences as factual scientific truth is an indication of intolerance and bigotry. Overall, scientism advances the notion that only hard sciences have the intellectual authority to provide real knowledge (Moreland, 2018).

Although scientism appears valid, there are two arguments that invalidate the notion. Firstly, any reality presented by hard science is simply a propositional truth that is provisional and is likely to change as scientific approaches become more advanced. To be more precise, hard sciences apply methodological approaches that only offers a perspective of reality, and is not a catalog of irrefutable facts or inflexible principles. Similar to the way hard sciences is disputable, is the same way in which soft science is disputable and adapts to newly presented evidence. Secondly, scientism is tyrannical since it promotes a dangerous brand of bloodless rationalism that disregards soft science although they are important for hard science. For instance, it disregards noble human endeavors such as literature, painting and music that are thought provoking through willfully denying or ignoring conclusions from hard sciences (Briggs, 2019).

Part 3.

(a) What is ultimate reality?

The ultimate reality is that humans are the product of interactions with the environment to include the neighborhood, education, parents, government, media, and so on. Through interaction with the environment, every individual is subtly influenced and shaped to comprehend how and why they exist. For instance, it is not surprising for an individual to ascribe to the religion that his or her parents ascribe to. Overall, the ultimate reality is only limited by experience and reason, which can influence the capacity to adequately understand and truly grasp the nature of human existence. Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example.

(b) What is the nature of the universe?

The universe is a static existence that is subject to constant change through the process of evolution, competition, and energy conversion. Firstly, the universe experiences evolution through adaptability and selection where only the most suitable biological entities that can outcompete other biological entities are able to survive even as they acquire the limited available resources. Secondly, competition is an inherent occurrence that determines who gets the best or worst resources. Finally, the universe is reliant on energy conversion in a well-structured system with the sun being the main source of energy that powers all other activities to include life and gravitational rotation of the earth.

(c) What is a human being?

A human being is a biological entity characterized through biological speciation and the capacity for higher thinking. Firstly, they are characterized through biological speciation with every human being identified as
Homo sapiens
. The speciation is validated by DNA profile similarities that indicated biological capacity to reproduce. Secondly, they have a capacity for higher thinking that allows them to adapt the environment to their needs through developing better food, clothing and machines as well as controlling all other animals. Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example.

(d) What is knowledge?

Knowledge refers to the set of skills, information and facts that are acquired through experience (practical) and education (theoretical that can be from formal or informal processes). Through acquiring knowledge, individuals gain an awareness and familiarity with different situations. In fact, it consists of recognizing differential awareness whose limitations are defined through awareness. Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example. For instance, all nurses have knowledge of nursing concepts, but the depth of knowledge will differ based on experience and level of education that determine awareness limitations of the different nursing concepts.

(e) What is your basis of ethics?

There are two basis of ethics. The first basis of ethics is the personal perspective that is reliant on what I consider right and wrong based on my beliefs through interacting with the environment, such as what my religion, culture, community, and family believe in Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example. The second basis of ethics is the public perspective that is based on public beliefs expressed through principles such as confidentiality principles that protect personal information. The personal and public perspectives all determine how I approach ethics with the public perspective taking precedence when the two perspectives are in conflict.

(f) What is the purpose of your existence?

The purpose of my existence is to live to my full potential, improve the world, and leave this world not worse than I found it so that my future generations are not placed at a disadvantage. I can live to my full potential through acquiring competent professional skills and applying this skills in earning a living. I can improve the world by having an analytical mind that notices the problems around me and proposing solutions to these problems. I can leave the world not worse that I found it through being cognizant of the impact of all my actions on eth environment and ensuring that I do not contribute to environmental degradation. Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example.

References

Briggs, W. (2019).
In opposition to scientism
. Retrieved from https://wmbriggs.com/post/26885/

Igboin, B. (2015). Spirituality and medical practice: a Christian perspective.
Indian Journal of Medical Ethics
, 12(4). doi: 10.20529/IJME.2015.054. Retrieved from http://ijme.in/articles/spirituality-and-medical-practice-a-christian-perspective/?galley=html

Moreland, J. (2018).
What is scientism?
Retrieved from https://www.crossway.org/articles/what-is-scientism/

Zavada, J. (2019).
Postmodernism definition
. Retrieved from https://www.learnreligions.com/what-is-postmodernism-700692 Worldview Analysis and Personal Inventory essay example