forcing professional obligations such as “duty
to respond” on health care workers
Clark (2005) suggests that forcing professional
obligations such as “duty to respond” on health
care workers is akin to requiring them to behave
like “supreme Samaritans”. The ever-present
threat of emerging public health disasters
demands a transparent discourse regarding the
acceptable standard of professional engagement,
whether that be at the level of “supreme”,
“good”, or “merely decent” Samaritans. Which
level do you think Australian paramedics should
operate at during a disaster?
Students should clearly identify which level
they believe that Australian paramedics should
operate at during a disaster – supreme, good, or
decent. You should develop a concise and
logical argument as to why you have chose the
level you have.
Assignments should:
1. Have a header on each page that
includes: Student name, student number, unit
code, and lecturer name. E.g. Sharon James,
1030405, PST3210, Dr Erin Smith.
2. Assignments should be written in Times
New Roman Font, Font size 12, with 1.5 sentence
spacing.
3. Students should structure their
assignment using four main sections:
Introduction; Body; Conclusion; References.
Refrain from using ‘Body’ as a sub-heading.
Instead, use relevant sub-headings within this
section to clearly identify what you are
discussing (e.g. Justification for acting at the
‘decent’ level, OR The argument for operating as
supreme Samaritans).
4. Students should include AT LEAST 15
references for this assignment. AT LEAST half
of these should be from peer-reviewed sources
(e.g. academic journals).
5. Referencing should be in APA format.
6. Ensure that you spell check your
assignment and use Australian spelling (e.g.
organise NOT organize).
TIPS!
You will be marked on overall presentation,
grammar, punctuation, spelling and sentence
construction – so take the time to produce a
concise and well-written document.
Don’t overly rely on direct quotes. One to two
direct quotes for an assignment this length
would be suitable.
Try to avoid simply repeating what others have
said. E.g. Smith et al (1980) suggest…..
INSTEAD, try to paraphrase the key finding and
then give the referene at the end of the
sentence. E.g. There is an identified mis-match
between public perceptions of paramedic
responsibilities during disaster and paramedic
willingness to undertake these roles (Smith,
1980).
Remember, while the focus of this essay is on
paramedics, relevant literature to back up your
argument is going to come from a broad range of
sources that publish on ethics and medicine. I
suggest that once you have determined which
level of care you think paramedics should
operate at during a disaster, you start off
looking for some background information to
include in your introduction. HINT – do a
Google search for standards of care during
disaster or something similar. Note that there
is extensive literature available on standards
of care and duty to respond during pandemics and
public health emergencies – this is really
useful to read and help you build your argument.
My suggestion would be that your introduction
has two-three good peer-reviewed references.
The body of your assignment should have the
remainder.
Also remember – your conclusion should be a
concise summary of the key points of your
assignment. HINT – re-read your essay. Write
down what you think the main key point is for
each paragraph. Put these key points together
into your conclusion. Be sure to not include
any new information in your conclusion that you
have not already included in the rest of your
essay.
Final tip is for paragraph development and
overall assignment structure. A good essay is
one that has a clear plan and structure and
sticks to it. There is a clear and logical
evolution of your argument throughout the essay,
with each paragraph have a CLEAR KEY POINT. If
you can’t identify one clear point in the
paragraph, then perhaps you have either need to
work on re-writing the paragraph to ensure you
make a key point, or reduce the number of points
you have made in the one paragraph and just
focus on elaborating on the one key idea.
Note – the key ideas for each paragraph should
logically build to provide your overall
assignment answer. I suggest that as a planning
tool for this assignment, you map out your essay
into paragraphs and key points.
E.g.
Introduction
Paragraph One – Key point: paramedics have an
important role to play in disaster response.
What are your references to help make this
point?
Paragraph Two – Key point: paramedics may not be
willing to undertake this role.
What are your references to help make this
point?
Body (Note, I would not have a sub-heading
called ‘Body’, I would use the key points to
identify key sub-headings).
Paragraph Three – Key point: One of the reasons
why paramedics are unwilling to undertake this
role could be the threat of legal action due to
unclear standards of care during disaster
response.
What are your references to help make this
point?
Paragraph Four – Key point: What are standards
of care?
What are your references to help make this
point?
Paragraph Five – Key point: Do you have any
examples? E.g. Hurricane Katrina, SARS
What are your references to help make this
point?
Paragraph Six – Key point: Given this background
and examples, what level of care do you think
Australian paramedics should operate at?
What are your references to help make this
point?
Paragraph Seven onwards. – Key point: WHY? This
is where you elaborate on the paragraph before.
Conclusion
Bring all of your key points together in a
summary.
If you have taken the time to plan out your
assignment structure like this, then this part
should be easy – simply go back to your plan and
pull out each of your key points and build them
into one-two paragraphs as an overall summary of
your argument.
(Clark CC. In Harm’s Way: AMA Physicians and the
Duty to Treat. J Med Philos 2005;30:65-87)
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US
TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂