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

PHI413V Week5 Case-Study On Death And Dying

Click here to ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT:  PHI413V Week5 Case-Study On Death And Dying

PHI413V Week5 Case-Study On Death And Dying
PHI413V Week5 Case-Study On Death And Dying

PHI413V Week5 Case-Study On Death And Dying

The practice of health care providers at all levels brings you into contact with people from a variety of faiths. This calls for knowledge and acceptance of a diversity of faith expressions.

The purpose of this paper is to complete a comparative ethical analysis of George’s situation and decision from the perspective of two worldviews or religions: Christianity and a second religion of your choosing. For the second faith, choose a faith that is unfamiliar to you. Examples of faiths to choose from include Sikh, Baha’i, Buddhism, Shintoism, etc.

In your comparative analysis, address all of the worldview questions in detail for Christianity and your selected faith. Refer to Chapter 2 of Called to Care for the list of questions. Once you have outlined the worldview of each religion, begin your ethical analysis from each perspective.

In a minimum of 1,500-2,000 words, provide an ethical analysis based upon the different belief systems, reinforcing major themes with insights gained from your research, and answering the following questions based on the research:

How would each religion interpret the nature of George’s malady and suffering? Is there a “why” to his disease and suffering? (i.e., is there a reason for why George is ill, beyond the reality of physical malady?)

In George’s analysis of his own life, how would each religion think about the value of his life as a person, and value of his life with ALS?

What sorts of values and considerations would each religion focus on in deliberating about whether or not George should opt for euthanasia?

Given the above, what options would be morally justified under each religion for George and why?

Finally, present and defend your own view.

Support your position by referencing at least three academic resources (preferably from the GCU Library) in addition to the course readings, lectures, the Bible, and the textbooks for each religion. Each religion must have a primary source included. A total of six references are required according to the specifications listed above. Incorporate the research into your writing in an appropriate, scholarly manner.

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.

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.

Rubric Criteria

Total 200 points

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less Than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

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.

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

6.5 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

7.5 points

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

8.5 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

10 points

All format elements are correct.

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.

Value of Life

Value of Life

0 points

Analysis of how the Christian worldview of the man might inform his view about the value of his life as a person with ALS is insufficient or not supported by topic study materials.

15.6 points

Analysis of how the Christian worldview of the man might inform his view about the value of his life as a person with ALS is unclear or vaguely supported by topic study materials.

18 points

Analysis of how the Christian worldview of the man might inform his view about the value of his life as a person with ALS is clear and supported by topic study materials.

20.4 points

Analysis of how the Christian worldview of the man might inform his view about the value of his life as a person with ALS is clear and skillfully supported by topic study materials.

24 points

Analysis of how the Christian worldview of the man might inform his view about the value of his life as a person with ALS is clear and demonstrates a deep understanding that is skillfully supported by topic study materials.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

10.4 points

Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

12 points

Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

13.6 points

Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

16 points

Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Personal Decision

Personal Decision

0 points

Reflection hypothesis of which personal choices would be made if faced with ALS based on personal worldview is insufficient.

13 points

Reflection hypothesis of which choices would be made if faced with ALS based on personal worldview is lacking a personal connection.

15 points

Reflection hypothesis of which personal choices would be made if faced with ALS based on personal worldview is clear.

17 points

Reflection hypothesis of which personal choices would be made if faced with ALS based on personal worldview is clear and thoughtful.

20 points

Reflection hypothesis of which personal choices would be make if faced with ALS based on personal worldview is clear, relevant, and insightful.

Euthanasia

Euthanasia

0 points

Evaluation of which values and considerations the Christian worldview focuses on when deliberating the option of euthanasia for the man is insufficient or not supported by topic study materials.

15.6 points

Evaluation of which values and considerations the Christian worldview focuses on when deliberating the option of euthanasia for the man is unclear or vaguely supported by topic study materials.

18 points

Evaluation of which values and considerations the Christian worldview focuses on when deliberating the option of euthanasia for the man is clear and supported by topic study materials.

20.4 points

Evaluation of which values and considerations the Christian worldview focuses on when deliberating the option of euthanasia for the man is clear and skillfully supported by topic study materials.

24 points

Evaluation of which values and considerations the Christian worldview focuses on when deliberating the option of euthanasia for the man is clear and demonstrates a deep understanding that is skillfully supported by topic study materials.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.

9.1 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.

10.5 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

11.9 points

Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

14 points

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Morally Justified Options

Morally Justified Options

0 points

Evaluation of which options would be justified in the Christian worldview for the man is insufficient or not supported by topic study materials.

15.6 points

Evaluation of which options would be justified in the Christian worldview for the man is unclear or vaguely supported by topic study materials.

18 points

Evaluation of which options would be justified in the Christian worldview for the man is clear and supported by topic study materials.

20.4 points

Evaluation of which options would be justified in the Christian worldview for the man is clear and skillfully supported by topic study materials.

24 points

Evaluation of which options would be justified in the Christian worldview for the man is clear and demonstrates a deep understanding that is skillfully supported by topic study materials.

Suffering and the Hope of Resurrection

Suffering and the Hope of Resurrection

0 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the hope of resurrection is insufficient or not supported by topic study materials.

15.6 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the hope of resurrection is unclear or vaguely supported by topic study materials.

18 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the hope of resurrection is clear and supported by topic study materials.

20.4 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the hope of resurrection is clear and skillfully supported by topic study materials.

24 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the hope of resurrection is clear and demonstrates a deep understanding that is skillfully supported by topic study materials.

Suffering and Fallenness of the World

Suffering and Fallenness of the World

0 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the fallenness of the world is insufficient or not supported by topic study materials.

15.6 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the fallenness of the world is unclear or vaguely supported by topic study materials.

18 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the fallenness of the world is clear and supported by topic study materials.

20.4 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the fallenness of the world is clear and skillfully supported by topic study materials.

24 points

Analysis of how the man would interpret his suffering in light of the Christian narrative and the fallenness of the world is clear and demonstrates a deep understanding that is skillfully supported by topic study materials.

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