You must draft and submit a position paper either defending or opposing the following position: “The current U.S. public health crisis, as evidenced by well-documented increase in deaths, injuries, and societal/individual costs resulting from gun violence, counterbalances an individual’s Second Amendment’s Constitutional gun ownership rights and justifies an increase in gun ownership, possession, and use restrictions (e.g., laws, regulations, policies).”
Defend position – Society, acting through the government, has sufficient ethical and legal authority and a compelling public health interest, right, and obligation to limit an individual’s gun rights under the Second Amendment.
Oppose position – Society, acting through the government, does not have sufficient ethical and legal authority or compelling public health interest, right, or obligation to limit an individual’s gun rights under the Second Amendment.
Scenario
In the United States, on average guns kill almost 30,000 people and cause 60,000 injuries each year and gun violence remains its leading cause of premature death.
In your readings, you learned of controversial policies and strategies to address gun violence in the U.S. For example, many cities have attempted a community approach of “gun buy-back” programs. Hartford, CT, reported that even though 464 firearms were collected over a four-year period, only a small percentage of firearms were collected compared to the number of firearms sold.
It has become evident that there needs to be a comprehensive public health approach to address this growing crisis. The issue of gun violence is even more exacerbated, and complex given the increase in acts of terrorism. Federal, state, and local governments are restricted from banning or unreasonably limiting the right of Americans to own guns by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The courts, however, have long held that this right is not absolute but subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. The issue then becomes what constitutes “reasonable” restrictions compatible with Constitutional protections and otherwise acceptable to the American public, federal and state legislatures, and, most importantly, the reviewing courts. This causes a tension in the protection of individual gun ownership rights and societal rights to ensure public health. We see this tension played out in our communities where there are both “zero tolerance” restrictions for firearms and weapons in public schools, in public buildings, and on airplanes while at the same time tolerance for gun possession at home and, in some areas, authorized open carry, including public university school campuses.
As noted in your readings, there appears to be a change in attitude towards increased gun control. For example, to reduce violence and save lives, New York City had adopted a “Stop, Question, and Frisk” policy that authorized police officers to stop and question a pedestrian and frisk for weapons and other contraband. However, on August 12, 2013, a U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the stop and frisk practice (not the law itself) was unconstitutional and directed NYC to adopt a written policy to reduce impermissible discriminatory police officer discretion. This illustrates the “checks and balances” of our political and legal systems and the inherent difficulty of trying to impose restrictions on a fundamental Constitutional right. So, while Second Amendment ownership rights are subject to “reasonable” time, place, and manner restrictions, the issues become what is reasonable and who decides? This is your task for this assignment.
Assignment Instructions
Paper must demonstrate and reflect critical thinking and analysis in your discussion. In other words, you must persuade your reader that your stated position is accurate, effective, and defensible. Your focus is to address the issue from a public health perspective addressing the relevant factual data and identified ethical and legal frameworks to arrive at your recommendation(s) and conclusion(s). I am not looking for an in-depth legal analysis of the U.S. Constitution and/or the law surround “stop and frisk” policies, although you will have to discuss and cite relevant laws and case law in your analyses
Gun Violence and Public Health Position Paper
Date:
Name:
Subject: [“Position Paper: Pro-Gun Regulation for Public Health Purposes” [“Position Paper: Anti-Gun Regulation for Public Health Purposes”]
Position Statement.. [“In response to the current U.S. gun violence public health crisis, society [does]/ [does not], acting through the government, has sufficient legal and/or ethical authority to limit an individual’s gun rights under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”]
Facts. [Provide a succinct summary of relevant facts, specifically the facts pertaining to gun violence and healthcare costs in the U.S. (e.g., number of guns in circulation, number of gun-related incidents, resulting healthcare and other costs). Use your course textbook or other sources, ensure you include both sides, and always ask yourself, if I were new to this issue what basic facts would I want/need to know? Always assume your intended reader has no prior knowledge of the issue and it is your job to briefly summarize what they need to know to make an intelligent decision and (hopefully) agree with and support your position.
Analysis
Legal Issue(s) Analysis. [Identify and address all relevant and applicable Constitutional, statutory laws, and reported cases that support that your policy position and why. Also identify and address all relevant and applicable Constitutional, statutory laws, and reported cases that do not support or are contrary to your position and explain why and how they could or should be interpreted or changed to address the current gun-related healthcare crisis and comport with your position.
Ethical Issue(s) Analysis. [Using your first written assignment as a template identify and discuss at least three applicable course Universal Values and identify and apply at least one course ethical decision-making model supporting your position. In doing so, ensure you describe the model, explain why this model is useful to the scenario’s ethical dilemma, fully list the model’s framework steps, and conduct your critical thinking analysis by thoroughly assessing each individual step. These individual framework step assessment are the most important part of your ethical decision-making model analyses so take your time and make them the focus of your effort.
For your ethical issue(s) analysis, to keep you focused and organized and to make your analytical process clear to your intended reader, structure it this way:
“The issue is whether the proposed Wellness policy is ethical. The accepted 8-step ethical decision-making process is. . ” [list and then address each step using the scenario facts] [NOTE: You already have this from your first assignment so just cut-and-paste it here].
“Three Universal Ethical Values applicable and relevant to this situation are [list each value].
The first ethical value for consideration is [state value]. This value requires . . . Applied to this situation, the proposed unauthorized disclosure of patient information, application of the value results in [state your assessment and analysis of the value vis-à-vis the scenario facts.
Repeat for the remaining two Universal Values.
[New paragraph] “An applicable decision-making model for this situation is. . . [ethical decision-making model] because. . .” [describe how this model is helpful for this situation]. “Its “X”-step framework is. . .”[completely list its steps] [NOTE: You already have this from your first assignment so just cut-and-paste it here].
[New paragraph] “For Step 1 we must consider/determine/address. . .” [Then fully address this step and its requirements, issues, etc. using scenario facts, outside source, etc. to conduct your analysis.]
NOTE: These individual framework step assessment are the most important part of your ethical decision-making model analyses so take your time and make them the focus of your effort. In other words, your focus of effort in your ethical analyses should be your framework steps-to-fact assessments. Take your time and provide a thorough and balanced assessment of each framework step. As a guide, each of these framework step analyses should be a separate 3-5 sentence paragraph.
Repeat this process for each of the remaining steps.
Finally, does the ethical decision-making model’s results align with your Universal Values results? [It should].
For an example of how to do all this, read and comply with my course Written Assignment Guidance, specifically the Practice Tip: Ethical Model Analysis located in the Getting Started Module.
Conclusion(s). [Provide 1 to 3 concise and specific issue conclusory bullets or short sentences. These conclusions must be based on your above ethical and legal analyses. Do not introduce any facts or issues not previously addressed above. Your conclusion(s) must be consistent with your stated position and ethical and legal analyses.
Recommendation(s). [Provide 1 to 3 concise and specific issue conclusory bullets or short sentences. Your recommendation(s) must be based on and supported by your above recommendations which are, in turn, based on and supported by your above ethical and legal analyses. Do not introduce any facts or issues not previously addressed above. Your recommendations must be consistent with or implement your stated position, ethical and legal analyses, and conclusion(s). .
References
[Properly cite all of your supporting ethical and legal references in this section].
[NOTE: Ensure you conduct a thorough pre-submission review, edit, and spelling check]
Executive Summary. [Provide a concise, one-line summary statement of issue, In this case use the following ” Does the organization have the legal right and ethical authority to disclose Patient A’s personal health information without her knowing and voluntary consent?”];
BLUF – Bottom Line Up Front. [Provide a concise answer to the Executive Summary – For example “Yes, release of the patient’s personal health information is both legal and ethical” or “No, the release of Patient A’s personal health information is neither legal not ethical,” or any combination thereof. Do not expand or provide justification for your position – this will covered in your section 4 analysis sections below. Note: this should be your last step because it is a one-line summary of your conclusion(s) and recommendation(s) which can only be properly determined and completed only after your conduct your section 4 ethical and legal analyses].
Facts: [Provide a succinct summary of relevant facts from the assignment scenario. Ask yourself, if I were new to this issue and had not read the proposed policy what basic facts would I want/need to know? Always assume your intended reader has no prior knowledge of the issue and it is your job to briefly summarize what they need to know to make an intelligent decision – here release or not release the information.]
Analysis
[Your analysis section, comprised of separate analyses addressing potential ethical and legal concerns, must answer and thoroughly explain the question whether the employer can or should (sometimes two different things!) legally and ethically implement the proposed plan and, most importantly, why or why not? Reminder – this must be an objective assessment based on recognized ethical values, assessment processes, and decision-making models and not a mere reflection of your personal, subjective opinion, likes, or dislikes concerning the terms and conditions of the proposed policy from an employee perspective.]
Part A. Legal Issue(s) Analysis Identification and Analysis
[In this section, you must determine whether the information Patient A provided to the hospital staff is legally protected from unauthorized disclosure. What federal law, if any, addresses this issue? If you identify an applicable law, state its full name and provide a proper legal citation. What section or rule address hospital patient information – be specific. What does information does the law protect and how does it protect that information – again, be specific. Identify and thoroughly assess any potential exceptions and determine if any exceptions apply in this case and specifically why or why not? Finally, identify the potential legal risk(s) to the hospital if the law is violated by an unauthorized release of patient A’s information. For example, would the hospital’s Board of Directors or other staff members (including yourself) risk potential civil liability ($$) and/or criminal prosecution with resulting fines and imprisonment?
Part B. Ethical Issue(s) Identification and Analysis
[In this section you will address, identify, objectively assess the ethical issues raised by this proposed policy to determine whether the unauthorized release of Patient A’s medical information would be ethical defendable. .
Using your first written assignment as a template, start by listing the course’s eight steps of the ethical decision-making process, identify and discuss at least three applicable course Universal Values, and identify and apply at least one course ethical decision-making model relevant to this scenario. In doing so, ensure you describe the model, explain why this model is useful to the scenario’s ethical dilemma, fully list the model’s framework steps, and conduct your critical thinking analysis by thoroughly assessing each individual step. These individual framework step assessment are the most important part of your ethical decision-making model analyses so take your time and make them the focus of your effort. For an example of how to do this, read and comply with my course Written Assignment Guidance, specifically the Practice Tip: Ethical Model Analysis located in the Getting Started Module.
Be thorough and specific in your analyses. Ensure your answer and thoroughly explain the question whether the employer can or should ethically implement the proposed plan and, most importantly, why?) Note: Do not work backwards by chosen an ethical decision-making model that supports your subjective opinion concerning the proposed policy. You are conducting an objective assessment so ensure you address both the employee and employer perspectives working fully, objectively, and fairly to justify, support your ethical issue(s) analysis result to answer the question. This may mean the models may provide conflicting results – that, unfortunately, is life. You, as the educated assessor have to weigh, balance, and decide on a recommended best course for the hospital and the patient.
Conclusion(s)
[In this section you provide your concise and specific issue conclusions based solely on and supported by your above ethical and legal analyses. Basically, you succinctly are answering your Executive Summary and justifying your BLUF. Note: You must not add any new facts, information, or analyses here and your conclusion(s) must be supported by your assessments above.
Example: “For the above stated reasons, Patient A’s information should be released to . . . because . . . (summarize rationale)
Recommendation(s)
[In this section you are providing specific “actionable” recommendations to the hospital. Release, not release, or partially release Patient A’s information to . . .
Note: Your recommendation(s) must be supported by and based on your conclusion(s) which, in turn, must be supported by and based on your analyses that are a result of you applying the rules (ethics and law) to the scenario facts provided.]
References
[Properly cite all of your supporting ethical and legal references in this section].
[Note 1: It is not enough to merely identify the issues and then task your superiors with conducting the hard analyses – that is your job to do the hard work, assess the risks, reach the correct and supported conclusions, and make the appropriate recommendations.]
[Note 2: Ensure you conduct a thorough pre-submission review, edit, and spelling check]
**Position Paper: Defending Increased Gun Ownership Restrictions**
The current U.S. public health crisis stemming from gun violence necessitates an increase in gun ownership restrictions to safeguard societal well-being and mitigate the devastating impacts of firearm-related deaths and injuries. As society grapples with the alarming statistics of almost 30,000 gun-related deaths and 60,000 injuries annually, it is imperative to recognize the ethical and legal authority of the government to enact measures aimed at curbing this epidemic.
From a public health perspective, the staggering toll of gun violence transcends individual rights, warranting comprehensive and effective interventions. The Second Amendment’s protection of gun ownership rights does not preclude the government from imposing reasonable restrictions to uphold public safety. Just as the government implements regulations to address other public health crises, such as infectious diseases or vehicle safety, it has a compelling interest and obligation to regulate firearms to prevent harm to individuals and communities.
Ethically, the principle of utilitarianism supports prioritizing the greatest good for the greatest number, which aligns with implementing gun ownership restrictions to reduce preventable deaths and injuries. Furthermore, the ethical principle of beneficence underscores the responsibility to prevent harm, emphasizing the moral imperative to enact policies that mitigate the adverse impacts of gun violence on society.
Legally, the courts have affirmed that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is subject to reasonable restrictions. While recognizing the importance of individual liberties, courts have upheld the government’s authority to impose regulations that serve a compelling public interest, such as public safety. Therefore, restrictions on gun ownership, such as background checks, waiting periods, and bans on assault weapons, are constitutionally permissible measures to protect public health.
To address the complexity of gun violence, a multifaceted approach is necessary, including community-based interventions, mental health support, and evidence-based policies. Gun buy-back programs and initiatives to promote safe storage practices can complement legislative measures to reduce access to firearms among high-risk individuals. Additionally, investments in research and data collection are crucial for informing effective policy interventions and evaluating their impact on public health outcomes.
In conclusion, the severity of the U.S. public health crisis resulting from gun violence warrants an increase in gun ownership restrictions to safeguard individual and societal well-being. By recognizing the ethical and legal authority of the government to implement reasonable regulations, society can take meaningful steps towards preventing further loss of life and mitigating the devastating impacts of gun violence on communities across the nation.
The post You must draft and submit a position paper either defending or opposing the following position appeared first on Destiny Papers.
