Allocating limited medications and donor organs – PROS/CONS. That is the topic we are debating.
NUR3829 – Ethical and Legal Issues in Healthcare
Keiser University
Ethics Debate
Guidelines and Grading Rubric
GUIDELINES
Nurses are often challenged in the workplace when conflicts arise between personal values and morals and professional
ethical principles. Although a strong theoretical background along with the application of ethical concepts can facilitate the
nurse in the ethical decision-making process, there are occasions in which even experienced nurses, struggle with resolving
an issue. Debating is a centuries old method of both informing and persuading groups of people to support a point of view.
The purpose of the Ethics Debates is for students to examine an ethical issue, and through the use of evidence, present their
pro/con position in an effort to influence the audience’s ethical decision.
Criteria and Instructions (Debate)
1. Student presents PRO position – Argument introduced (3 min)
2. Student presents CON position – Argument introduced (3 min)
3. Student Presents PRO position – Delivery of major point 1 with evidentiary support (3 min)
4. Student presents CON position – Rebuttal/delivery of major point 1 with evidentiary support (5 min)
5. Student presents PRO position – Rebuttal/ delivery of major point 2 with evidentiary support (5 min)
6. Student presents CON position – Rebuttal/delivery of major point 2 with evidentiary support (5 min)
7. Student for teams to plan final rebuttal/delivery of major point 3 (10 min)
8. Student presents PRO position – Rebuttal/delivery of major point 3 with evidentiary support (5 min)
9. Student presents CON position – Rebuttal/delivery of major point 3 with evidentiary support (5 min)
10. Student presents summary of key points/concluding arguments – PRO (3 min)
11. Student presents summary of key points/concluding arguments – CON (3 min)
12. Voting – audience evaluates debate teams/poses questions to the group (10 min)
Criteria and Instructions (Debate Paper)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Each group (Pro and Con) will submit a Debate Paper.
The paper (excluding the title page and references page) should be at least 3 pages. Points will be lost for not
meeting the length requirement.
Use font and font sizes acceptable by 7th ed. APA
Introduction (write an introduction, but do not use “introduction” as a heading in accordance with APA rules)
Use of the following subheadings to organize the content of your paper:
a. Significance of Problem
b. Ethical Position
• Major point 1
• Major point 2 Medical PROS
• Major point 3
c. Nursing Recommendations
d. Conclusion
This assignment must be submitted to SafeAssign. Resubmit is similarity is >15%.
A minimum of 5 scholarly references must be used. Scholarly references need to be current, 5 years or less
(anonymous authors or web pages are not acceptable).
Title page, body of paper, and reference page must follow APA guidelines as found in the 7th edition of the manual.
This includes the use of headings for each section or topic of the paper.
Ideas and information that come from readings must be cited and referenced correctly.
NUR3829 – Ethical and Legal Issues in Healthcare
Keiser University
10. Rules of grammar, spelling, word usage, and punctuation are followed and consistent with formal written work as
found in the 7th edition of the APA manual
Ethical and Legal Issues in Healthcare – Debate Paper Rubric
Content
Meets Criteria
Introduction
Introduces the purpose of the paper
and identifies pro/con position
Partially Meets Criteria
Identifies pro/con position, does
not identify purpose of paper
Does Not Meet Criteria
Purpose of paper not introduced,
does not identify pro/con position
5 points
Or
Does not identify pro/con position,
introduces purpose of paper
Clearly articulates significance of
the problem in relation to health
care and nursing
Attempts to articulate significance
of the problem in relation to health
care and nursing
Does not articulate significance of
the problem in relation to health
care and nursing not clarify goal
Presents major points 1-3 with 2-3
pieces of scholarly evidence to
support pro/con position. Evidence
is significant and persuasive.
Presents major points 1-3 with less
than 2-3 pieces of scholarly
evidence to support pro/con
position or evidence is insignificant
and not persuasive.
Does not present major points 1-3
or does not provide evidence to
support pro/con position.
Excellent discussion of future
nursing
implications/recommendations
based on pro/con position with
references to ethical
principles/theories.
Limited discussion of nursing
implications/recommendations
based on pro/con position, little to
no reference to ethical
principles/theories.
Does not discuss nursing
implications/recommendations
based on pro/con position, does
not reference ethical
principles/theories.
Excellent summary of problem,
position, major points, and nursing
responsibilities.
Limited summary of problem,
position, major points, and nursing
responsibilities.
No summary of problem, position,
major points, or nursing
responsibilities.
5 points
Excellent use of standard English
showing original thought with
minimal reliance on the works of
others. No spelling or grammar
errors. Well organized with proper
flow of meaning.
Some evidence of own expression
and competent use of language. No
more than three spelling or
grammar errors. Well organized
thoughts and concepts.
Language needs development or
there is an over-reliance on the
works of others. Four or more
spelling and/or grammar errors.
Poorly organized thoughts and
concepts.
APA Format
APA format correct with no more
than 1-2 minor errors.
3-5 errors in APA format and/or 12 citations are missing.
APA formatting contains multiple
errors and/or several citations are
missing.
Significance of the
Problem
20 points
Ethical Position
40 Points
Nursing
Recommendations
20 points
Conclusion
5 points
Clarity of Writing
5 points
Total
A 5-point late deduction for each calendar day
NUR3829 – Ethical and Legal Issues in Healthcare
Keiser University
11. Ethical and Legal Issues in Healthcare Debate Rubric
Level 4
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
20 points
15 points
10 points
5 points
The team clearly understood the topic
in-depth and presented the
information convincingly
The team understood the topic
in-depth and presented the
information with ease
The team seemed to understand
the main points of the topic and
presented those with some
efficiency
The team did not show an
adequate understanding of the
topic
Opening statement clearly defines the
viewpoint of the team and briefly lists
the 3 major points in a clever and
interesting way
Opening statement clearly
defines the viewpoint of the
team and briefly lists their 3
major points in a somewhat
interesting way
Opening statement attempts to
clearly define the viewpoint of
the team and briefly lists 2
major points
Opening statement does not
define the viewpoint and does
not list major reasons
Points 1-3 clearly expresses their
viewpoint, including at least 3 details
(for point 1) and examples to support
their answer in a highly persuasive
manner
Points 1-3 clearly expresses
their viewpoint, including at
least 3 details (for point 1) and
examples to support their
answer in a somewhat
interesting way
Points 1-3 attempts to clearly
express their viewpoint,
including only 2 details (for
point 1) and examples to
support their answer
Points 1-3 attempts to clearly
express their viewpoint,
including only 1 detail (for
point 1) and examples to
support their answer
All counter-arguments were accurate,
relevant, and strong. Was able to
accurately defend position based on
current scholarly literature
Majority of counter-arguments
were accurate, relevant, and
strong. Was able to accurately
defend position based on
current scholarly literature
Some counter-arguments were
accurate, relevant, and strong.
Was somewhat able to defend
position based on current
scholarly literature
Counter-arguments were not
accurate/relevant. Was unable
to defend position
Concluding statement clearly sums
up the viewpoint of the team and
briefly lists their three major points in
a clever and interesting way
Concluding statement clearly
sums up the viewpoint of the
team and briefly lists their 3
major points in a somewhat
interesting way
Opening statement attempts to
clearly sum up the viewpoint of
the team and briefly lists 2
major points
Opening statement does not
sum up the viewpoint and does
not list major reasons
Total
Understanding of Topic
20 points
Opening Statement
20 points
3 Major Points
20 points
Rebuttal
20 points
Concluding Statement
20 points
Total
NUR3829 – Ethical and Legal Issues in Healthcare
Keiser University
TOPICS:
CHILDHOOD VACCINATION POLICY IN THE UNITED STATES – PROS/CONS
ALLOCATING LIMITED MEDICATIONS AND DONOR ORGANS – PROS/CONS

Purchase answer to see full
attachment