NURS-FPX4000–Assessment 4: DEI and Ethics in Healthcare

In a 3–5 page paper, describe the role of diversity, equity, and inclusion in healthcare and strategies for overcoming bias.

Introduction

This assessment is an opportunity for you to analyze and have a better understanding of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and the importance of recognizing unconscious bias and microaggressions in the field of healthcare. Your insights and reflections are valued, so feel free to draw from your own experiences to provide depth to your paper. In addition to the suggested readings, use the Capella library to locate at least two academic peer-reviewed journal articles published within the last 3–5 years to support your main points and conclusions.

Write Your Paper

• Describe the evolution of DEI in healthcare and how it is continuing to influence patient care.
  • Reflect on how the concept of diversity, equity, and inclusion has evolved during your career.
  • Discuss any significant changes, initiatives, or policies that have contributed to a more inclusive healthcare environment.
• Explain how unconscious bias leads to microaggressions.
  • Discuss how unconscious bias can lead individuals to make assumptions about others based on their appearance or other characteristics associated with their identity.
  • Describe the ways in which individuals may not be aware of the biases that influence their perceptions and behaviors.
  • Explain how unconscious bias may lead individuals to show preference for those who are perceived as being similar to themselves in terms of race, gender, or other characteristics.
  • Discuss how, while often unintended, microaggressions have a negative impact on the individuals who experience them.
• Describe strategies for overcoming bias in healthcare and how they can continue to shape DEI practices in the future.
  • Discuss any initiatives or training programs that address unconscious bias and microaggressions, and how they have influenced your practice.
  • Explain the importance of diverse workforce and leadership.
• Explain how DEI in healthcare results in improved health outcomes and increased patient satisfaction.
  • Discuss how healthcare providers are better equipped to understand and respect the cultural beliefs, practices, and preferences of their diverse patient population.
  • Describe how an inclusive company allows patients to feel heard, understood, and valued.

Organize your paper using the following structure and headings:

• Title page. (A separate page.)
• Describe the evolution of DEI in healthcare and how it is continuing to influence patient care.
• Explain how unconscious bias leads to microaggressions.
• Describe strategies for overcoming bias in healthcare and how they can continue to shape DEI practices in the future.
• Explain how DEI in healthcare results in improved health outcomes and increased patient satisfaction.
• Conclusion. (One paragraph.)
• References. (A separate page.)

Academic Requirements

Your paper should meet the following requirements:

• Length: Include at least 3–5 typed, double-spaced pages, in addition to the title page and reference page.
• Font and font size: Use Times New Roman, 12 point.
• Writing: Produce text with minimal grammar, usage, spelling, and mechanical errors.
• Sources: Integrate into text appropriate use of scholarly sources, evidence, and citation style.
• References: Use at least two scholarly or academic peer-reviewed journal articles and three in-text citations within the paper. Visit the Evidence and APA page if needed. Use scholarly or academic peer-reviewed journal articles published during the past 3–5 years that relate to your topic. Visit BSN Program Library Research Guide for help with research.
• Academic Honesty: Submit a draft of your assessment to Turnitin and make any necessary changes before you submit it to your instructor for grading.

Example assessment: You may use the Assessment 4 Example [PDF] to give you an idea of what a Proficient or higher rating on the scoring guide would look like.

Competencies Measured

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and scoring guide criteria:

• Competency 4: Describe strategies for overcoming biases in healthcare settings.
  • Describe the evolution of DEI in healthcare and how it is continuing to influence patient care.
  • Explain how unconscious bias leads to microaggressions.
  • Describe strategies for overcoming bias in healthcare and how they can continue to shape DEI practices in the future.
  • Explain how DEI in healthcare results in improved health outcomes and increased patient satisfaction.
• Competency 5: Write for a specific audience, in an appropriate tone and style, in accordance with Capella writing standards.
  • Produce text with minimal grammatical, usage, spelling, and mechanical errors.
  • Integrate into text appropriate use of scholarly sources, evidence, and citation style.

Introduction

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are foundational principles that continue to transform the landscape of modern healthcare. As the patient population becomes increasingly diverse, healthcare professionals must cultivate environments that recognize and respect differences in culture, race, ethnicity, gender, age, and belief systems. DEI initiatives promote fair treatment, equal access to care, and an inclusive workplace culture—key factors that directly influence patient outcomes and satisfaction. Understanding DEI and its ethical and practical implications ensures that nurses and healthcare leaders deliver care that is not only competent but also compassionate and just.

This assessment provides an opportunity to analyze the evolution of DEI within healthcare, explore the impact of unconscious bias and microaggressions, and identify effective strategies for promoting fairness and inclusivity in professional practice. By reflecting on both historical progress and ongoing challenges, this paper aims to highlight the importance of cultural humility and self-awareness in reducing disparities and improving communication across diverse populations.

Furthermore, the discussion emphasizes the role of continuous education and organizational initiatives in addressing unconscious bias—an often invisible barrier to equitable care. Through intentional efforts such as bias training, diverse leadership, and culturally responsive care models, healthcare systems can foster trust and build stronger patient–provider relationships. Ultimately, advancing DEI principles in healthcare is not only a moral imperative but also a clinical necessity for achieving equitable health outcomes and ensuring that every patient feels valued, heard, and respected.

Place your Order Now

NURS-FPX4000–Assessment 2: Applying Research Skills

Create a written assessment, including an annotated bibliography section, to document your research on a healthcare problem or an issue faced by current healthcare organizations.

Introduction

In your professional life, you will need to find credible evidence to support your decisions and plans of action. You will want to keep abreast of best practices to help your organization adapt to the ever-changing healthcare environment. Being adept at research helps you find the information you need. This assessment gives you practice with that skill by having you research a healthcare problem or issue faced by current healthcare organizations.

Overview

You will select a current healthcare problem or issue from the provided options for this assessment. Research your topic, and develop a written assessment, which includes an annotated bibliography to document your resources.

Reminder: You will use your selected problem or issue again in upcoming assessments. The purpose of this assessment is to ensure you know how to research topics and find credible references to use in your assessments. Part of the assessment is an annotated bibliography. The purpose of an annotated bibliography is to document a list of research references, along with key information about each; the detail about the reference is the annotation. Developing this annotated bibliography will create a foundation of knowledge about your chosen problem or issue.

Prepare

Conduct research in the Capella library to find a total of three scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles in relation to a selected healthcare problem or issue presented in the Assessment 02 Supplement: Applying Research Skills [PDF] Download Assessment 02 Supplement: Applying Research Skills [PDF]resource. You must select your healthcare-related issue or problem from the topic areas presented in this resource.

Important Note: Review the BSN Nursing Program Library Research Guide for assistance. Be sure to review journal articles published within the past three to five years.

Write Your Paper

Write a 3–5 page paper in which you include the following:

Topic Identification

Select one of the healthcare problems or issues presented in the Assessment 02 Supplement: Applying Research Skills [PDF] Download Assessment 02 Supplement: Applying Research Skills [PDF]resource. Write a brief overview of the healthcare problem or issue. In your overview:

• Summarize the healthcare problem or issue, including describing its professional relevance.
• Describe your interest in the problem or issue.
• Describe any professional experience you have with this topic.

Discussion of Research

Discuss your research and selection process for each of the three journal articles you have chosen to include in your annotated bibliography.

• Describe your process of applying library research skills to identify the journal articles relevant to the healthcare problem or issue you are researching.
  • Identify the keywords you used to select the articles.
  • Describe the criteria you used to select the resources, including the names of the databases you used.
  • What was the process like to locate relevant articles?
• Assess the credibility of the information sources.
  • Determine whether each resource is from an academic, peer-reviewed journal.
  • Determine whether the publication is current (published within the last 3–5 years).
  • Determine whether information in the academic peer-reviewed journal article is still relevant.
• Assess the relevance of the information sources.
  • Explain how the healthcare problem or issue is addressed in each source.
  • Discuss what kind of contribution each resource provides.

Place your Order Now

Annotated Bibliography

Summarize each of the three current academic, peer-reviewed journal articles you chose, using the annotated bibliography organizational format. The purpose of an annotated bibliography is to document a list of references along with key information about each one. The detail about the reference is the annotation. Developing this annotated bibliography will create a foundation of knowledge about the selected topic. In your annotated bibliography:

• List each full reference in APA format, followed immediately by its annotation.
  • Present your three current, annotated references in alphabetical order, according to the reference citation.
  • Double-space each reference and format it with a hanging indent.
  • Provide the full APA reference citation, including the author, date, title, publisher or publication, and any additional information required by APA style.
• Write the annotation (summary) for each citation in paragraph form, using approximately 150 words (or 1–3 paragraphs) for each citation. Make sure to cite the article in your summary. Include the following components for each annotation:
  • Identify the purpose of the article.
  • Summarize the article.
  • Include the conclusions and findings of the article.

Summary

In a separate paragraph or two at the end of the paper, summarize what you learned from the process of developing the annotated bibliography.

Academic Requirements

Your academic writing is expected to conform to the following requirements:

• Writing: Produce text with minimal grammar, usage, spelling, and mechanical errors.
• Sources: Integrate into text appropriate use of current scholarly sources, evidence, and citation style. Use the Evidence and APA guidelines provided. Cite the reference in its summary.
• Formatting: Include a title page and reference page, Times New Roman, 12 point.
• Length: Complete no more than 3–5 typed, double-spaced pages, in addition to the title page and reference page.
• References: Although you are citing your three scholarly or academic peer-reviewed journal articles within the Annotated Bibliography section of this paper, be sure to also list your citations on a reference page at the end of your paper, along with any other resources you may have included.

Example assessment: You may use the Assessment 2 Example [PDF] to give you an idea of what a Proficient or higher rating on the scoring guide would look like.

Submit your paper as an attached Microsoft Word document.

Competencies Measured

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies and scoring guide criteria:

• Competency 1: Apply information literacy and library research skills to obtain scholarly information in the field of healthcare.
  • Summarize a healthcare problem or issue, including describing its professional relevance.
  • Describe the process for selecting academic peer-reviewed journal articles relevant to a healthcare problem or issue being researched.
  • Summarize what was learned from developing an annotated bibliography as it relates to the topic and the ability to use the annotated bibliography process for future assessments.
• Competency 2: Apply scholarly information through critical thinking to solve problems in the field of healthcare.
  • Assess the credibility and relevance of information sources.
  • Summarize academic peer-reviewed journal articles using the annotated bibliography organizational format.
• Competency 5: Write for a specific audience, in an appropriate tone and style, in accordance with Capella writing standards.
  • Produce text with minimal grammatical, usage, spelling, and mechanical errors.
  • Apply APA formatting to in-text citations and references.

Scoring Guide

Use the scoring guide to understand how your assessment will be evaluated.

Expand All

Criterion 1

Summarize a healthcare problem or issue, including describing its professional relevance.

Distinguished

Summarizes a healthcare problem or issue, including describing its professional relevance, providing examples.

Proficient

Summarizes a healthcare problem or issue, including describing its professional relevance.

Basic

Summarizes a healthcare problem or issue, including describing its professional relevance, but without describing its professional relevance.

Non Performance

Does not summarize a healthcare problem or issue, including describing its professional relevance.

Criterion 2

Describe the process for selecting academic peer-reviewed journal articles relevant to a healthcare problem or issue being researched.

Distinguished

Describes the process for selecting academic peer-reviewed journal articles relevant to a healthcare problem or issue being researched, including barriers encountered in finding appropriate search term utilized and databases searched.

Proficient

Describes the process for selecting academic peer-reviewed journal articles relevant to a healthcare problem or issue being researched.

Basic

Describes a process for finding journal articles, though they may not be academic peer-reviewed or relevant to the issue being researched.

Non Performance

Does not describe the process for selecting academic peer-reviewed journal articles relevant to a healthcare problem or issue being researched.

Criterion 3

Assess the credibility and relevance of information sources.

Distinguished

Assesses the credibility and relevance of information sources, and identifies assumptions for considering the sources relevant.

Proficient

Assesses the credibility and relevance of information sources.

Basic

Assesses the credibility of information sources without assessing their relevance.

Non Performance

Does not assess the credibility and relevance of information sources.

Criterion 4

Summarize academic peer-reviewed journal articles using the annotated bibliography organizational format.

Distinguished

Summarizes academic peer-reviewed journal articles using the annotated bibliography organizational format, including identifying gaps the articles didn’t cover or areas of uncertainty.

Proficient

Summarizes academic peer-reviewed journal articles using the annotated bibliography organizational format.

Basic

Summarizes academic peer-reviewed journal articles using portions of the annotated bibliography organizational format.

Non Performance

Does not summarize academic peer-reviewed journal articles using the annotated bibliography organizational format.

Criterion 5

Summarize what was learned from developing an annotated bibliography as it relates to the topic and the ability to use the annotated bibliography process for future assessments.

Distinguished

Summarizes what was learned from developing an annotated bibliography as it relates to the topic and the ability to use the annotated bibliography process for future assessments, including providing examples.

Proficient

Summarizes what was learned from developing an annotated bibliography as it relates to the topic and the ability to use the annotated bibliography process for future assessments.

Basic

Summarizes the process of developing an annotated bibliography.

Non Performance

Does not summarize what was learned from developing an annotated bibliography as it relates to the topic and the ability to use the annotated bibliography process for future assessments.

Criterion 6

Produce text with minimal grammatical, usage, spelling, and mechanical errors.

Distinguished

Produces text free of grammatical, usage, spelling, and mechanical errors.

Proficient

Produces text with minimal grammatical, usage, spelling, and mechanical errors.

Basic

Produces text with some grammatical, usage, spelling, and mechanical errors, making text difficult to follow at times.

Non Performance

Produces text with significant grammatical, usage, spelling, and mechanical errors, making text difficult to follow.

Criterion 7

Apply APA formatting to in-text citations and references.

Distinguished

Exhibits strict and nearly flawless adherence to APA formatting of in-text citations and references.

Proficient

Applies APA formatting to in-text citations and references.

Basic

Applies APA formatting to in-text citations and references incorrectly and/or inconsistently, detracting noticeably from good scholarship.

Non Performance

Does not apply APA formatting to in-text citations and references.

Introduction

In today’s rapidly evolving healthcare environment, the ability to identify credible evidence and apply research findings to practice is an essential skill for healthcare professionals. As healthcare organizations navigate complex challenges—from patient safety and workforce shortages to rising costs and quality improvement—effective decision-making must be guided by accurate, evidence-based information. This assessment provides an opportunity to strengthen research competency by exploring a current healthcare problem or issue, identifying reliable sources, and documenting findings through an annotated bibliography.

Developing strong research and information literacy skills ensures that healthcare practitioners remain informed about emerging trends, innovations, and best practices. The process of investigating a healthcare issue encourages critical thinking, ethical inquiry, and professional accountability. Furthermore, building an annotated bibliography serves as a foundational step in constructing a well-supported understanding of the chosen problem or issue. It enables learners to assess the credibility and relevance of scholarly sources, summarize key findings, and synthesize knowledge that informs both academic and clinical practice.

By completing this assessment, I aim to enhance my ability to locate, evaluate, and interpret scholarly evidence that addresses a pressing healthcare concern. The task underscores the importance of continuous learning and evidence-based decision-making within the nursing profession. Ultimately, this research process not only contributes to academic growth but also prepares me to apply data-driven insights in real-world healthcare settings—supporting quality improvement, ethical leadership, and patient-centered outcomes.

Place your Order Now 

COS305 – Skills in Advocacy Practice in Disability.

Assessment 2 (40%)

Assessment Type: Individual Written Report (Case Study Essay)
Due Date: Week 9 – 24/10/2025
Open From: Week 5
Word Limit: 2000 words (±10%)
Weighting: 40%
Referencing Style: APA 7th Edition

 Task Overview

Select one (1) case study from the list below. Using advocacy frameworks and theories, analyse the client’s situation, identify barriers to advocacy, and propose strategies and evidence-based recommendations to address the issues. The assessment must demonstrate your ability to apply advocacy principles, ethical practice, and theoretical understanding to real-world disability and discrimination scenarios.

Instructions for Students

1. Select one case study from the list provided.
2. Identify key advocacy issues and barriers impacting the client.
3. Apply relevant advocacy models or frameworks (e.g., self-advocacy, systems advocacy, citizen advocacy).
4. Analyse the situation using relevant theories and concepts from class (e.g., empowerment theory, social justice, human rights).
5. Propose realistic and ethical recommendations supported by evidence and theory.
6. Include APA 7th Edition referencing for all in-text citations and references. Minimum 5 current (post-2010) peer-reviewed academic sources are required.
7. Structure your report using clear headings and logical flow:
   • Introduction
   • Case Overview
   • Advocacy Analysis
   • Barriers and Challenges
   • Recommendations
   • Conclusion
   • Reference List

Case Studies (Choose One)

1. Overlooked for promotion because of psychiatric disability
2. Denied employment in mine
3. Passed interview but not hired after medical check
4. Not suitable for job because of mental health conditions
5. Woman with autism intimidated by fellow tenants and lease terminated
6. Bathroom modifications to fit walking frame rejected by housing provider

Purpose of the Assessment

 

To demonstrate the student’s capacity to apply advocacy theory and practice in real-world disability discrimination contexts, analyse barriers to effective advocacy, and develop informed and ethical recommendations that promote inclusion and human rights.

 

1. Overlooked for promotion because of psychiatric disability

Ivan has a psychiatric disability and was employed as a process worker for a food manufacturer.

Ivan applied for a supervisor position which had become available at work. He was interviewed for the position but was not successful. Ivan’s psychiatric disability meant that he did not perform well in the interview, and he felt this is why he didn’t get the job. When other opportunities for promotion became available, Ivan felt he was then overlooked, despite having the necessary experience.

Ivan says that his employer was aware of his disability and should have made allowances for him in the recruitment process.

Ivan lodged a complaint of disability discrimination with ADNSW.

During conciliation, Ivan’s employer said that they were not aware of his disability when he was applying for a promotion.

Place your Order Now

2. Denied employment in mine

Bob* is an experienced underground miner. He sought employment in a local mine which was recruiting workers. Employment at this particular mine would provide Bob the benefit of working close to home without the need for camp life.

Bob made it through several stages of the recruitment process. However, the recruitment process did not continue after the mine was dissatisfied with Bob’s spirometer readings, which measure the amount of air Bob was able to breathe in and out and the time it takes him to exhale completely after a deep breath.

Bob lodged a complaint with ADNSW alleging disability discrimination. ADNSW investigated the complaint by obtaining relevant information from both parties.

The mine owner said the recruitment process was unable to progress further. Mine employees are required to have a full unrestricted medical clearance. The mine said it had serious concerns about Bob being able to carry out the inherent requirements of the position. The mine claimed that the information they had was unclear about whether allowing Bob to work could aggravate any underlying lung weakness, and as a result they were unable to determine whether he could carry out the inherent requirements of the position.

Bob maintained that he had no underlying medical condition other than a very mild degree of airflow limitation. He saw a respiratory doctor who confirmed this and reported that Bob may have been born with the condition.

 

3. Passed interview but not hired after medical check

Sylvana*, a person living with Fibromyalgia and Hypermobility, applied for a clerical job. She was successful at interview but did not get the role after a medical check.

Sylvana lodged a disability discrimination complaint with Anti-Discrimination NSW (ADNSW). ADNSW investigated the matter by speaking with both Sylvana and the hiring company.

The company said that Sylvana’s employment depended on her passing the medical assessment. They said that while the job was mostly office work, some lifting was required. According to the medical assessment, lifting would put Sylvana at risk of injury. They also said it would cause unjustifiable hardship to the company to change the role by removing lifting duties.

Sylvana said her medical conditions do not affect her ability to do the office work and that she was able to lift within limits set by SafeWork guidelines.

Place your Order Now 

4. Not suitable for job because of mental health conditions

Sarah applied for a job as a community care worker with an aged care provider. She had previous experience in similar roles with other employers.

Sarah was interviewed for the position and felt it went well. It went longer than the allocated time and she felt the interviewers reacted positively to her responses. During the interview, Sarah disclosed that she lived with anxiety and depression.

Sarah progressed to the next stage of recruitment, providing further information and submitting to a police check and pre-employment medical.

A week later, Sarah got an email advising her that she didn’t get the job. When she rang the employer for an explanation, she says she was advised that her level of anxiety and depression made her unsuitable for the position.

Sarah lodged a complaint of disability discrimination with ADNSW.

When ADNSW investigated the complaint, the employer denied that Sarah’s disability was the reason she didn’t get the job. The employer said that Sarah’s responses to some questions raised concerns about her ability to maintain appropriate boundaries with clients. They apologised for any miscommunication of its reasons for not employing Sarah.

 

5. Woman with autism intimidated by fellow tenants and lease terminated

Amelie* is a woman living with autism. She is a tenant of social a housing accommodation provider. Amelie said she felt preyed upon, socially isolated and vulnerable to harassment and intimidation from other tenants because of her disability.

Amelie requested to transfer to different accommodation and was placed on a transfer request list. However, Amelie’s accommodation provider later removed Amelie from their transfer list and began to process a termination of Amelie’s lease.

Amelie made a complaint of disability discrimination to ADNSW.

The accommodation provider denied unlawfully discriminating against Amelie. They said they removed Amelie from their transfer request list and began to terminate Amelie’s lease because they were responding to multiple complaints from other tenants about Amelie’s alleged anti-social behaviour and her breach of the Residential Tenancy Agreement.

 

6. Bathroom modifications to fit walking frame rejected by housing provider

Seth* lives in subsidised housing. He has physical disabilities and uses a walking frame. Seth approached his housing provider to make changes to the layout of his bathroom so that he could use his walking frame inside the bathroom.

The housing provider was reluctant to make the recommended modifications that were supported by Seth’s Occupational Therapist and instead suggested that Seth move to alternative housing.

Seth had lived in the house for several years and did not want to move away from the area. He made a complaint with ADNSW of disability discrimination by his housing provider.

 

Formatting Requirements

• Word processed, 1.5 spacing, 12-point Arial or Calibri.
• Include student name, ID, unit code, and assessment title.
• Use page numbers and consistent heading levels.
• Submit as a Word or PDF document via LMS.

Academic Integrity

All submissions must be original. Plagiarism or AI-generated content without proper acknowledgement will be reported under the Academic Integrity Policy.

Place your Order Now 

End of Assessment Task 2 – COS305

 

Marking Rubric (Aligned to Learning Outcomes)
Criteria	Ratings					Pts
	High Distinction (HD)	Distinction (D)	Credit (C)	Pass (P)	Fail (F)	Weight
1.        Application of       Advocacy Frameworks	Demonstrates deep understanding and application of advocacy models and frameworks (e.g., self, systems, citizen advocacy). Integrates theoretical and ethical perspectives clearly. Demonstrates strong understanding and accurate use of advocacy frameworks with good theoretical links. Demonstrates some understanding of advocacy principles, with partial theoretical integration. Limited understanding of advocacy frameworks; minimal theoretical linkage. Lacks understanding of advocacy or applies it incorrectly.					20 pts
2.        Critical Analysis & Identification of Barriers	Insightful identification of complex issues and barriers. Demonstrates advanced critical thinking using theories and evidence. Identifies most relevant issues/barriers; analysis is clear and supported by theory. Identifies key issues but analysis lacks depth or connection to theory. Identifies basic issues but lacks justification or theoretical depth. Fails to identify relevant issues or shows poor analysis.					25     pts
3.        Recommendations & Advocacy Strategies	Provides innovative and evidence-based recommendations aligned with theories and frameworks. Prioritisation is clear and justified. Provides practical recommendations that are mostly well justified and theory-based. Provides recommendations that are partially linked to theory or lack depth. Provides simplistic or weakly justified recommendations. No or irrelevant recommendations.					25pts
4.        Structure, Organisation & Academic Writing	Professionally structured report with excellent organisation, transitions, and readability. Meets all formatting requirements. Well-structured and clearly organised report; minor issues in flow or format. Generally, well organised; some uneven flow or formatting issues. Structure is inconsistent or hard to follow; several formatting errors. Poorly organised or unclear; lacks structure and logical flow.					15 pts
5.        Research & Referencing (APA 7th Edition)	Integrates 10+ credible, recent, peer-reviewed sources. Referencing is flawless. 8–9 quality sources with minimal referencing errors. 6–7 relevant sources; some minor referencing errors. 5 acceptable sources but several referencing issues. Fewer than 5 academic sources; inconsistent or incorrect referencing.					15 pts

Total Points: 100

Introduction

Advocacy in disability contexts is not merely about representation—it is about promoting equity, human rights, and empowerment for individuals who experience systemic and attitudinal barriers. Within Australia’s legal and social frameworks, advocacy plays a vital role in ensuring that people with disabilities enjoy fair treatment, particularly in workplaces where discrimination can be subtle yet deeply damaging. This case study explores Ivan’s experience—a process worker overlooked for promotion due to his psychiatric disability—and analyses it through the lens of advocacy theories and frameworks.

Psychiatric disabilities, such as depression, bipolar disorder, or anxiety disorders, often attract social stigma and misunderstanding, influencing workplace decisions and perpetuating inequality. Ivan’s case, where an employer allegedly failed to provide reasonable accommodations during the promotion process, underscores a broader challenge faced by many individuals with psychosocial disabilities: the lack of systemic understanding and inclusive practices in employment settings.

Using advocacy frameworks such as self-advocacy, systems advocacy, and citizen advocacy, this report examines the ethical and theoretical dimensions of Ivan’s situation. The discussion integrates empowerment theory, human rights principles, and social justice frameworks to highlight how advocacy can challenge discrimination and promote inclusion. The analysis identifies key barriers—such as stigma, inadequate policy enforcement, and limited awareness of legal obligations under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)—that prevent individuals like Ivan from accessing equal employment opportunities.

Ultimately, this report aims to propose evidence-based and ethical recommendations for both individual and organisational advocacy interventions. These strategies will demonstrate how advocacy can be used to uphold Ivan’s rights, improve employer accountability, and foster a more inclusive workplace culture.

Place your Order Now 

Comprehensive Assessment and Fluid Management of a Dehydrated Pediatric Patient with Tonsillitis: A Case of Harry Worth

At 08.00, a nine-year-old boy called Harry Worth was admitted with 5% dehydration as a result of ongoing tonsillitis. His date of birth is 12^th January 2015. His UMRN is E435678. He weighs 37kg. His mother is incredibly worried about him and appears anxious. Harry has a respiratory rate of 36, his Sats are 98, you take a pulse, and it is 155. His blood pressure is 122/66, and his temperature is 38.1.

Place your Order Now

He has commenced on two antibiotics and parental rehydration according to guidelines. At 9.00, you give a dose of Paracetamol and commence the IV parental fluid. The standard dosing for Paracetamol is 15mg/kg, and it comes in strawberry flavour at 24mg/ml.

Since admission, the patient has consumed a light breakfast, including toast and 100 mL of juice.

At 10.00, you give the first dose of Ceftriaxone 1.85g; the patient vomits 60mL and drinks 100 mL of water. By 10.00, he had consumed 150 grams of jelly and some crackers.

At 11.00, the patient urinates 200 mL

He eats a banana and 100 grams of ice cream for lunch at noon.  At 12.00 you give the first dose of Vancomycin 555mg as an IV infusion.

At 13.00, he drinks another 100 mL of water and vomits 60mls again.

At 14.00, he urinates 150mls.

Place your Order Now

The next nursing shift will continue monitoring his fluid intake and output to ensure proper rehydration. Calculate his fluid balance chart and early warning score (EWS) and provide a handover to the afternoon staff, highlighting any deficits/actions.

1. Using the following formulas calculate the deficit fluid and maintenance fluid Harry requires
2. How many mL of Paracetamol would you give?
3. a) How many mL of Ceftriaxone will you need for the correct dose?
4. b) How many mL will you give Harry to ensure the medication has the correct concentration?
5. c) At what rate will you set the syringe driver to give the medication over the correct time?
6. a) How many mL of Vancomycin will you need for the correct dose?
7. b) How many mL of Vancomycin will you give Harry to ensure the medication has the correct concentration?
8. c) At what rate will you set the pump to give the medication over the correct time?
9. a) What is Harry’s EWS?
10. b) What actions will you take?
11. Please write the handover you would give the afternoon staff.

Please complete the fluid balance chart on the following page. Make sure you include all fluid input and output.

Introduction

Effective fluid management and clinical observation are vital aspects of pediatric nursing care, especially for children presenting with dehydration secondary to infection. This case study focuses on Harry Worth, a nine-year-old boy admitted with 5% dehydration due to ongoing tonsillitis. Upon admission, Harry exhibited signs of systemic distress, including a raised pulse rate of 155, elevated temperature of 38.1°C, and mild tachypnea with a respiratory rate of 36 breaths per minute. His presentation reflects a moderate physiological response to infection and dehydration, requiring careful monitoring and evidence-based intervention.

The case highlights the importance of accurate calculations in pediatric dosing, fluid replacement, and early warning scoring (EWS) to ensure safe and effective treatment. It also underscores the nurse’s role in interpreting clinical data, maintaining fluid balance, and communicating essential information during handover to ensure continuity of care.

Through this case, key nursing responsibilities are examined, including the calculation of deficit and maintenance fluids, precise medication dosing, and the assessment of Harry’s ongoing condition through the EWS system. Each intervention—from the administration of antibiotics such as Ceftriaxone and Vancomycin to the monitoring of intake and output—plays a crucial role in promoting recovery, preventing complications, and reassuring an anxious parent.

Overall, this study provides an integrated approach to pediatric care, combining clinical reasoning, pharmacological accuracy, and compassionate nursing practice to support optimal patient outcomes in a hospital setting.

Place your Order Now