For this assignment, read the background information and then learn about Diane Mathis’ experience with non-English-speaking patients.
Read the Intro and the Case Story. Then listen to the Lecture. http://support.mchtraining.net/national_ccce/case2/home.html
Before you begin your paper, review the Critical Thinking Rubric linked below. Refer to it as you develop your paper. It will be used to assess and grade your paper.
In a 3-page paper:
- Compare and contrast the range of medical language interpretation and describe what is considered “best practice”.
- Consider and describe at least two scenarios in situations in which patients are non-English speaking and qualified language interpretation is not provided. What are the key ethical principles to be considered? What are the implications for the patient in each alternative?
- How would the scenario relate to your own health profession’s code of ethics? If you are not currently working in healthcare, you should use the code of ethics for the profession you plan to pursue upon graduation.
– To earn full credit, review all required background materials and ensure that your paper meets these standards:
Review this Critical Thinking Rubric. Refer to it as you develop your paper. It will be used to assess your papers.
LENGTH: Your paper should be typed and double-spaced, with one-inch margins and 12-point font, and meet the exact number of pages specified in the assignment instructions.
COVER PAGE: Copy the exact assignment onto your cover page (the actual questions or task).
REFERENCES: Cite your references in the text of all papers and on the reference list at the end. For examples, review the way the references are listed in the modules and on the background reading list.
PRECISION: Each question of the assignment is specifically addressed in the paper.
CLARITY: The paper reads clearly (i.e., it is not confusing) and is well-structured. Subheadings are used to guide the reader.
BREADTH: The paper presents appropriate breadth covering the questions of the assignment (multiple perspectives and references, multiple issues/factors considered, as appropriate).
DEPTH: The paper presents points that lead to a deeper understanding of the matters and/or issues being discussed and integrates several points into coherent conclusions.
EVIDENCE: Statements and points are well-supported with facts or statistics, and references.
CRITICAL THINKING: Set aside personal biases and instead approach the subject matter using available scholarly evidence. Consider the strengths and weaknesses of competing arguments/perspectives on this topic. Having read these scholarly sources, make a judgment as to the merit of the arguments presented therein.