Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

Assignment: Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

Assignment: Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

https://nursingpaperslayers.com/assignment-benchmark-patients-spiritual-needs-case-analysis/

Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

Spiritual and religious needs are essential aspects of care provision, especially through the concepts of holistic and patient-centric care. Cultural competence, existing ethical guidelines, and biomedical ethics implore providers to allow patients exercise autonomy, independent decisions, demonstrate their values and preferences in a medical and health situation. However, a spiritual needs assessment is a critical component that allows patients to get holistic care based on their increased involvement (Lazenby, 2018). The purpose of this paper is to evaluate decisions by Mike concerning James’ treatment and if there is need for spiritual assessment.

Allowing Mike to Continue making Decisions about James’ Treatment

Physicians and other healthcare providers have an ethical and professional obligation and responsibility to respect the autonomy of patients and their preferences. Patient autonomy entails the right to make decisions concerning their medical care and treatment without any undue influence or coercion from their providers (Sabo, 2021). The providers have a duty to offer all information for patients to make informed choices and decisions but not to force them based on the concept of informed consent.

In this case, James has no competence to make decisions about his care because he is a minor and that responsibility rests with his parents, Mike and Joanne. The principle of autonomy is an essential aspect in this case as the physician is obligated to respect the decisions made by the parents to forego dialysis. Under the concept, physicians and other providers should educate patients adequately and offer sufficient information about their conditions. The physician should use the opportunity to make Mike understand the effects of delays in treatment using scientific evidence. Through this approach, Mike and Joanne can analyze the issue from an informed point of view.

However, the physician should not impose his perspective on Mike and needs to acknowledge that they have autonomy and are legally required to make decisions concerning their son’s health interventions. The only practical way that the physician cannot allow Mike to make irritation decisions is to provide sufficient information concerning the available options for James’ condition (Beckwith & Thornton, 2020). The physician should base his options on the rational choice model and guide Mike to analyze the negative effects of foregoing dialysis and their interest in hoping for a miracle to heal James.

Thinking about Sickness and Health, Medical Interventions and Mike’s Actions

Religion has an essential role in health as it impacts patients’ decisions in significant ways. Christians ought to think about sickness as an opportunity for one to understand the negative effects of certain things and lifestyles. Christians need to consider sickness as a normal natural occurrence that happens not because of their sinful nature but response to environmental conditions that they get exposed to in their areas of living and working. Christians should consider health as a virtue or gift from God and enables them to be present for those suffering (Sabo, 2021). Health reflects God’s love for all people while sickness shows that one needs to get closer to God. While sickness entered the world because of the Original Sin, Christians triumph over it through Jesus Christ. Therefore, Christians should understand God’s intent for sickness. Christians like Mike should not think that sickness is lack of faith and hope in God. Sickness reaffirms the future grace that God will show onto his people.

Christians should accept medical interventions as they are called to embrace science and its biomedical uses to alleviate suffering while maintaining the sanctity of life. Medical interventions combined with prayers lead to healing and restoration of individual health (Saad, 2018). Christians should consider the medical knowledge as God’s gift to heal his people and eliminate suffering. Medical knowledge is a demonstration of the intelligence that man has from God. Seeking medical assistance does not indicate a lack of faith but a way of respecting God’s command as opined Jesus Christ in Mathew 9:12. One should seek medical attention when sick to maintain God given life.

Mike needs to maintain his faith in God since He has power to heal his son despite the delicate nature of his condition. As a Christian, he should know that God has power over sickness and heals the sick. Mike needs to trust God to heal his son through the medical interventions prescribed and recommended by the physician. He should continue praying for a miracle but allow James to undergo the medical procedures for his failing kidney. Mike should act in the best interests of his child. He should utilize the information offered by the physician to make the most appropriate decision to alleviate his son’s suffering. God works in a miracle way and the couple should trust that spiritual healing will happen and allow the physician and the medical team to do their best.

As strong a Christian, Mike should keep his unshaken faith in God. However, to honor the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence for James’s condition, Mike must prioritize the choices and recommendations being fronted by the physician and his team. Beneficence focuses on providing greater good for patients and taking actions that are in their best interests. Mike should honor beneficence by considering James sickness and acknowledging the importance of a kidney transplant to save his life. Non-maleficence means causing no harm; either intentionally or not to patients (Beckwith & Thornton, 2020). Mike should understand that the recommendations by the physician are not meant to harm James. They are in his best interests. Therefore, he should trust that God will not allow the physician and his team to harm James and through the intervention, his son will get healing.

A Spiritual Needs Analysis for Mike to Make Appropriate Interventions for James

Spiritual needs of patients are crucial to providing effective and holistic care. Providers require cultural competence to offer holistic care and spiritual needs encompass this kind of care. The main goal of a spiritual needs analysis is to enable physicians and other providers support patients by incorporating their religious beliefs, values, norms and practices into care plans (Isaac et al., 2017). The assessment also allows patients to use spiritual resources to enhance their overall wellness. Through a spiritual needs analysis test, physicians can modify their therapeutic approaches and alliances with patients to enhance overall care delivery.

Carrying out spiritual needs analysis is challenging, particularly when patients have no idea about their spiritual presence. In such instances, physicians can use several assessment tools like HOPE and FICA models to establish a rapport with patients and incorporate their preferences into care plans. In this case, having a spiritual needs analysis will allow the physician to help Mike and Joanne establish the most appropriate approach for the sons (Kang et al., 2018). Through the analysis, the physician can collaborate with chaplains to help Mike understand and relate James’ situation and the interventions to God to attain healing. The test will provide a context for the stakeholders involved in the treatment of James to discuss all potential approaches and make beneficial decisions for his sake. A spiritual assessment will create a safe place for Mike to discuss their religious beliefs, concerns, perspectives, and wishes concerning the health and treatment of their son without any fear of being judged. Physicians have limited roles in spiritual assessment and should work closely with chaplains to ensure that the assessment meets its target goals.

Conclusion

The case study demonstrates a terrible and unpredictable situation that Mike and his family are encountering due to the health status of their son, James. The family needs sufficient information, support, and practical interventions like the spiritual needs analysis to understand their circumstances and offer relevant help to James. Therefore, a spiritual needs assessment would be an integral part of efforts to improve James’ condition.

References

Beckwith, F., & Thornton, A. K. (2020). Moral status and the architects of principlism. In The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine (Vol. 45, No. 4-5, pp. 504-520). US: Oxford University Press.

Isaac, K., Hay, J., & Lubetkin, E.  (2017) Incorporating Spirituality in primary Care.Journal of

            Religion and Health, 55(3), 1065-1077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-016-0190-2

Kang, K. A., Choi, Y., & Kim, Y. (2018). Reliability and validity of an instrument assessing spiritual needs of families of terminal cancer patients. The Korean Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care, 21(4), 144-151. https://doi.org/10.14475/kjhpc.2018.21.4.144.

Lazenby, M. (2018). Understanding and addressing the religious and spiritual needs of advanced cancer patients. In Seminars in oncology nursing (Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 274-283). WB Saunders.

Macdonald, G. (2019). Spiritual needs assessment: the LOADS SHARED mnemonic. British

            Journal of General Practice, 69(688), 573-574. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp19X706505

Riklikienė, O., Tomkevičiūtė, J., Spirgienė, L., Valiulienė, Ž., & Büssing, A. (2020). Spiritual needs and their association with indicators of quality of life among non-terminally ill cancer patients: Cross-sectional survey. European Journal of Oncology Nursing, 44, 101681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2019.101681.

Sabo, A. (2021). Practicing Dignity: An Introduction to Christian Values and Decision Making

            in Health Care (1st Edition). Grand Canyon University – Digital Resources.

Saad, T. C. (2018). The history of autonomy in medicine from antiquity to principlism.

Medicine, health care and philosophy, 21(1), 125-137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019017-9781-2.

Timmins, F., & Caldeira, S. (2017). Assessing the spiritual needs of patients. Nursing standard,

31(29):47-53. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns.2017.e10312.

Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

In addition to the topic study materials, use the chart you completed and questions you answered in the Topic 3 about “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” as the basis for your responses in this assignment.

Answer the following questions about a patient’s spiritual needs in light of the Christian worldview.

1) In 200-250 words, respond to the following: Should the physician allow Mike to continue making decisions that seem to him to be irrational and harmful to James, or would that mean a disrespect of a patient’s autonomy? Explain your rationale.

2) In 400-500 words, respond to the following: How ought the Christian think about sickness and health? How should a Christian think about medical intervention? What should Mike as a Christian do? How should he reason about trusting God and treating James in relation to what is truly honoring the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence in James’s care?

3) In 200-250 words, respond to the following: How would a spiritual needs assessment help the physician assist Mike determine appropriate interventions for James and for his family or others involved in his care?

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.

ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT: Assignment: Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

Assessment Description

In addition to the topic Resources, use the chart you completed and questions you answered in the Topic 3 about “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” as the basis for your responses in this assignment.

Answer the following questions about a patient’s spiritual needs in light of the Christian worldview.

  1. In 200-250 words, respond to the following: Should the physician allow Mike to continue making decisions that seem to him to be irrational and harmful to James, or would that mean a disrespect of a patient’s autonomy? Explain your rationale.
  2. In 400-500 words, respond to the following: How ought the Christian think about sickness and health? How should a Christian think about medical intervention? What should Mike as a Christian do? How should he reason about trusting God and treating James in relation to what is truly honoring the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence in James’s care?
  3. In 200-250 words, respond to the following: How would a spiritual needs assessment help the physician assist Mike determine appropriate interventions for James and for his family or others involved in his care?

Assignment: Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

Remember to support your responses with the topic Resources.

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.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.

Benchmark Information

This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies:

BS in Health Sciences 1.2; BS Nursing (RN to BSN ) 5.2

Assess for the spiritual needs and provide appropriate interventions for individuals, families, and groups.

Attachments

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

Assignment: Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

Benchmark – Patient’s Spiritual Needs: Case Analysis – Rubric

Decision-Making and Principle of Autonomy

Criteria Description

Decision-Making and Principle of Autonomy

5. Excellent

60 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed from both perspectives with a deep understanding of the complexity of the principle of autonomy. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

4. Good

51 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are clearly analyzed from both perspectives with details according to the principle of autonomy. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

3. Satisfactory

45 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are clearly analyzed from both perspectives, but the analysis according to the principle of autonomy lack details. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

39 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed from both perspectives, but the analysis according to the principle of autonomy is unclear. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are not analyzed according to the principle of autonomy.

Decision-Making, Christian Perspective, and the Principles of Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

Criteria Description

Decision-Making, Christian Perspective, and the Principles of Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

5. Excellent

60 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed with deep understanding of the complexity of the Christian perspective, as well as with the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

4. Good

51 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are clearly analyzed with details according to the Christian perspective and the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

3. Satisfactory

45 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are clearly analyzed according to the Christian perspective and the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence but lacks details. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

39 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed according to the Christian perspective and the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence, but the analysis is unclear. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are not analyzed according to the Christian perspective and the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence.

Spiritual Needs Assessment and Intervention (B)

Criteria Description

Spiritual Needs Assessment and Intervention (C1.2, 5.2)

5. Excellent

60 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is clearly analyzed with a deep understanding of the connection between a spiritual needs assessment and providing appropriate interventions. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

4. Good

51 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is clearly analyzed with details. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

3. Satisfactory

45 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is clearly analyzed but lacks details. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

39 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is analyzed, but unclear. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is not analyzed.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Criteria Description

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

5. Excellent

10 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. Good

8.5 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

3. Satisfactory

7.5 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

6.5 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Documentation of Sources

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

5. Excellent

10 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Good

8.5 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Satisfactory

7.5 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

6.5 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

Total 200 points

Rubric Criteria

Total 200 points

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less Than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Decision-Making, Christian Perspective, and the Principles of Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

Decision-Making, Christian Perspective, and the Principles of Beneficence and Nonmaleficence

0 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are not analyzed according to the Christian perspective and the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence.

39 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed according to the Christian perspective and the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence, but the analysis is unclear. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

45 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are clearly analyzed according to the Christian perspective and the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence but lacks details. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

51 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are clearly analyzed with details according to the Christian perspective and the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

60 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed with deep understanding of the complexity of the Christian perspective, as well as with the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

6.5 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

7.5 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

8.5 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

10 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

Decision-Making and Principle of Autonomy

Decision-Making and Principle of Autonomy

0 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are not analyzed according to the principle of autonomy.

39 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed from both perspectives, but the analysis according to the principle of autonomy is unclear. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

45 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are clearly analyzed from both perspectives, but the analysis according to the principle of autonomy lack details. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

51 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are clearly analyzed from both perspectives with details according to the principle of autonomy. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

60 points

Decisions that need to be made by the physician and the father are analyzed from both perspectives with a deep understanding of the complexity of the principle of autonomy. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

Spiritual Needs Assessment and Intervention (B)

Spiritual Needs Assessment and Intervention (C1.2, 5.2)

0 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is not analyzed.

39 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is analyzed, but unclear. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

45 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is clearly analyzed but lacks details. Analysis is not supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

51 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is clearly analyzed with details. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

60 points

How a spiritual needs assessment would help the physician assist the father determine appropriate interventions for his son, his family, or others involved in the care of his son is clearly analyzed with a deep understanding of the connection between a spiritual needs assessment and providing appropriate interventions. Analysis is supported by the case study, topic study materials, or Topic 3 assignment responses.

Documentation of Sources

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

6.5 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent and/or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

7.5 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

8.5 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

10 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.
error: