How does the health care professional define ethical challenges?

Contact a health care professional and arrange to conduct an interview. Use the interview to understand the ethical perspective of the health care professional regarding the following:

1. How does the health care professional define ethical challenges?
2. How does the health care professional handle ethical challenges?

Write a 1,250-1,500 word paper based on the interview in which you address the following:

1. Explain the application of ethics in the health care environment of the interviewee.
2. Compare and contrast the interviewee’s answers with what you have learned in this course.
3. Include additional resources that support, reinforce, or even challenge your findings and observations.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

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. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

Rubic_Print_Format

Course Code	Class Code	Assignment Title	Total Points
HLT-520	HLT-520-O500	Ethics in Health Care Interview	140.0
Criteria	Percentage	Unsatisfactory (0.00%)	Less Than Satisfactory (74.00%)	Satisfactory (79.00%)	Good (87.00%)	Excellent (100.00%)	Comments	Points Earned
Content	70.0%
Application of Ethics in Health Care Environment	35.0%	A description of the applications in ethics in the health care environment of the interviewee is not included.	A description of the applications in ethics in the health care environment of the interviewee is incomplete or incorrect.	A description of the applications in ethics in the health care environment of the interviewee is included but lacks detail.	A description of the applications in ethics in the health care environment of the interviewee is complete and includes detail.	A description of the applications in ethics in the health care environment of the interviewee is extremely thorough with substantial supporting evidence.
Compare and Contrast of Learned Concepts	35.0%	A description that compares and contrasts the answers of the interviewee with what was learned in the course is not included.	A description that compares and contrasts the answers of the interviewee with what was learned in the course is incomplete or incorrect	A description that compares and contrasts the answers of the interviewee with what was learned in the course is included but lacks detail.	A description that compares and contrasts the answers of the interviewee with what was learned in the course is complete and includes detail.	A description that compares and contrasts the answers of the interviewee with what was learned in the course is extremely thorough with substantial supporting evidence.
Organization and Effectiveness	20.0%
Thesis Development and Purpose	7.0%	Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.	Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.	Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.	Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.	Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
Argument Logic and Construction	8.0%	Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.	Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.	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.	Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.	Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)	5.0%	Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.	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.	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.	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.	Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
Format	10.0%
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)	5.0%	Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.	Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.	Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.	Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.	All format elements are correct.
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)	5.0%	Sources are not documented.	Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.	Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.