Education Physician Aid In Dying Case Study Assignment

PhysicianAidCaseStudyAssignment.docx Physician Aid-in-Dying is a practice that is legal in a number of states within the United States due to the passing of the Death with Dignity Act. Please make sure to research this topic prior to beginning this assignment, as you will need to apply this research to your paper. Case Study: Physician Aid-in-Dying in Portland, Oregon A 35-year-old male named Zachary Davis has lived in and been a legal resident of Portland for almost 20 years. In the fall of 2018 he began having terrible headaches. After months of suffering with these, Zachary made the decision to see his primary care provider. His provider decided that scans should be done to rule out anything serious before beginning treatment for what he thought was probably migraine headaches. Zachary had the routine scans and at 5:00 p.m. he received a call from his doctor with the results. Zachary was diagnosed with advanced stage glioblastoma multiforme brain cancer, one of the deadliest brain tumors with a very low survival rate. Zachary immediately began aggressive treatment. After 12 weeks of treatment, they saw no improvement in his condition. At that time, his doctors sat down with him to discuss options. He was given approximately 6 months to live, giving him the dreaded diagnosis of being terminally ill. They discussed hospice care and other end-of-life options. After surveying the options, Zachary expressed the wish to participate in Physician Aid-In-Dying. Considering all aspects of the Death With Dignity legislation that has been passed into law in Oregon, consider the following in a paper of 1,000-1,250 words:  1. Does Zachary meet the requirements to take part in this practice? Why? Be detailed and specific in your evaluation of this practice.  2. Considering Death With Dignity legislation, is mental health a component that is evaluated and considered? Do you support this aspect of the legislation?  3. As we near end of life it is often that a surrogate is put in place for our medical decisions. How does this work with the practice of Physician Aid-in-dying?  4. What do you anticipate seeing in the future with this controversial practice in health care? PLEASE USE REFERENCES HLT-305Rubric-PhysicianAid-in-DyingCaseStudy.pdf 5/3/25, 1:44 PM Page 1 of 9about:srcdoc Physician Aid-in-Dying Case Study - Rubric Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements 18 points Criteria Description Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements 5. Excellent 18 points Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying. 4. Good 15.3 points Essay clearly and thoroughly considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying. 3. Satisfactory 13.5 points Essay considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying. 2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points Essay vaguely considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Essay does not consider whether the requirements are met to proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying. Collapse All 5/3/25, 1:44 PM Page 2 of 9about:srcdoc Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation 17 points Criteria Description Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation 5. Excellent 17 points Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses whether mental health is a component that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation. 4. Good 14.45 points Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses whether mental health is a component that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation. 3. Satisfactory 12.75 points Essay discusses whether mental health is a component that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation. 2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points Essay vaguely discusses whether mental health is a component that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Essay does not discuss whether mental health is a component that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation. 5/3/25, 1:44 PM Page 3 of 9about:srcdoc Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying 17 points Criteria Description Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying 5. Excellent 17 points Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses how surrogate decision- making works with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying. 4. Good 14.45 points Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying. 3. Satisfactory 12.75 points Essay discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying. 2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points Essay vaguely discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Essay does not discuss how surrogate decision-making works with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying. 5/3/25, 1:44 PM Page 4 of 9about:srcdoc The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying 18 points Criteria Description The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying 5. Excellent 18 points Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying. 4. Good 15.3 points Essay clearly and thoroughly anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying. 3. Satisfactory 13.5 points Essay anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying. 2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points Essay vaguely anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Essay does not anticipate what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying. 5/3/25, 1:44 PM Page 5 of 9about:srcdoc Thesis Development and Purpose 7 points Criteria Description Thesis Development and Purpose 5. Excellent 7 points Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. 4. Good 5.95 points Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. 3. Satisfactory 5.25 points Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. 2. Less Than Satisfactory 4.55 points Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. 5/3/25, 1:44 PM Page 6 of 9about:srcdoc Argument Logic and Construction 8 points Criteria Description Argument Logic and Construction 5. Excellent 8 points Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. 4. Good 6.8 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. 3. Satisfactory 6 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. 2. Less Than Satisfactory 5.2 points Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. 1. Unsatisfactory 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. 5/3/25, 1:44 PM Page 7 of 9about:srcdoc Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5 points Criteria Description Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) 5. Excellent 5 points Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. 4. Good 4.25 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 3.75 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 3.25 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. 5/3/25, 1:44 PM Page 8 of 9about:srcdoc Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5 points Criteria Description Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) 5. Excellent 5 points All format elements are correct. 4. Good 4.25 points Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. 3. Satisfactory 3.75 points Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. 2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. 5/3/25, 1:44 PM Page 9 of 9about:srcdoc Documentation of Sources 5 points Criteria Description Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5. Excellent 5 points Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. 4. Good 4.25 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. 3. Satisfactory 3.75 points Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. 2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. 1. Unsatisfactory 0 points Sources are not documented. Total 100 points © 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. https://www.gce.com/ https://www.gce.com/ https://www.gce.com/ https://www.gce.com/ https://www.gce.com/ https://www.gce.com/ https://www.gce.com/ https://www.gce.com/ https://www.gce.com/