Maternal Health Quality Improvement Act Of 2021 Sample Paper

The current medical environment, which includes many policies enacted by government entities, insurance providers, and organizations, poses challenges for nurses and patients. These two parties are frequently trapped between the repercussions of budget limits and access to appropriate quality healthcare. As nurses engage with their clients, they are often the first professionals to notice healthcare system failures and how these glitches affect care delivery (Edmonson et al., 2017). Daily, nurses observe the influence of health policies on patients and the demand for more fundamental reforms in laws that address a wide range of health-related concerns.

When nurses assume the role of regulatory advocates to fix the process, they are known to leave the comfort zones of their practicing arena to enter unfamiliar territory. Policies and rules affecting care delivery are established in these positions, and hurdles for limited resources are bargained. Accepting this duty, as complex and time-demanding as it might be, provides nurses with a remarkable opportunity to create a difference and experience the gratification of playing an essential role in making a better healthcare system. Advocacy provides a layer to their clinical practice that rewards them with more significant influence over patient care.

Bill: The Maternal Health Quality Improvement Act of 2021

Bill Number: H.R. 4387

Sponsor: Rep. Kelly Robin of Illinois

Co-sponsors: Mr. Bucshon, Ms. Adams, Mr. Burgess, Mrs. Hayes, Mr. Latta

The Maternal Health Quality Improvement Act (MHQIA) of 2021 seeks to improve maternal health access to mothers in rural areas, reducing healthcare inequality in the United States. Nurses and other healthcare professionals are set to benefit from this bill in many ways. First, the bill sets aside funds to facilitate maternal health innovations to increase the adoption of evidence-based practices in clinics. With improved early diagnosis and prompt access to medical care, innovation can assist optimize care quality for mother and fetus by reducing newborn and maternal mortalities and lowering medical costs throughout the client’s entire medical journey.

Nurses usually first are the first patient advocates in healthcare facilities. Most are caught by emotional trauma or psychological drain when they fail to deliver the best care for their patients. However, the MHQIA seeks to prevent this problem by increasing healthcare efficiency through innovation. This strategy will lead to increased access to healthcare through the development of cheaper treatment procedures.

This bill also seeks to prevent implicit bias and racism in maternal healthcare. Implicit bias is commonly thought to significantly impact how healthcare practitioners interact with and handle African American women, leading to inequities in maternal health (Green et al., 2021). As a result, policymakers have advocated for adopting unconscious bias education in prenatal care settings. The MHQIA intends to increase funding to nursing colleges and healthcare facilities to train professional nurses and nursing students about implicit bias and its effects on quality care.

Reducing Maternal Health Inequalities in Rural Areas

In the United States, around 700 maternal fatalities occur yearly, with an extra 50,000 cases of severe maternal morbidities (Kozhimannil et al., 2019). Severe maternal morbidities refer to potentially fatal complications or the necessity for life-saving surgery during or shortly after delivery. Cardiac arrest, cerebrovascular disease, thrombosis, or an urgent hysterectomy resulting from childbirth are all cases of severe maternal morbidity. Interestingly, there are contrasting patterns in rural and urban populations, with rural inhabitants experiencing higher death rates.

Kozhimannil et al. (2018) conducted a retrospective cohort study to investigate the link between the reduction of hospital-based maternal services, delivery location, and neonatal outcomes in rural regions. An annually discontinuous time-series data technique was used in this retrospective cohort research, which used county-level predictive models. Births in remote U.S. counties from 2004 to 2014 were located using birth records. In 2004, 4,941,387 deliveries in all 1086 remote counties had hospital-based obstetrics. They discovered that more remote counties (179) in the United States lost access to maternal obstetric services than urban counties. The decline in in-patient obstetrics in remote counties was related to a rise in out-patient births, deliveries in a facility without antenatal services, and premature births. These factors led to a rise in poor prenatal care utilization over the research period.

In a second study, Kozhimannil et al. (2019) conducted a cross-sectional study to investigate in-patient maternal health disparities between rural and urban populations using government in-patient data between 2007 and 2015. During the research, they discovered that maternal and neonatal morbidities and mortalities rose among rural and urban populations, rising from 109 per 10,000 postpartum admissions in 2007 to 152 for every 10,000 in 2015. When they accounted for sociodemographic and clinical variables, they discovered that rural inhabitants had a 9% higher likelihood of severe maternal morbidity and death than urban populations—paying attention to remote patients and medical care institutions’ challenges is critical to implementing initiatives to minimize maternal morbidities and deaths in remote regions. Clinical variables like understaffing and the opioid crisis are among the obstacles, as are socioeconomic factors that influence health, like transport, shelter, and unemployment.

Cyr et al. (2019) conducted a systematic review to compare health access disparities between rural and urban populations. They systematically reviewed the literature published between 2013 and 2018 in databases like CINAHL and ProQuest. Search criteria focused on peer-reviewed scholarly articles relevant to access to urban or rural specialized U.S. health care. They discovered that most problems were associated with both urban and rural populations. However, rural healthcare facilities were prone to a lack of accommodation and insurance policies, which endangered maternal healthcare.

Nidey et al. (2019) conducted a cross-sectional study to investigate the risk differences in perinatal depression among women living in remote and urban areas of the United States. They evaluated the relationship between rural-urban positions and the risk of developing depression during the postpartum period using the national health records database. The overall analytical sample comprised 17,229 women from 14 different states. The risk of prenatal depression was assessed using logistic regression after controlling for ethnicity, maternal age, and county of residency. The findings point to a rural-urban disparity in prenatal levels of depressive symptoms. Addressing this discrepancy may necessitate enhancing socioeconomic situations and lowering potential risks among rural women.

Wendling et al. (2021) conducted a cross-sectional study to investigate the quality of maternal care in remote Michigan counties. The findings were confirmed using Internet research and phone conversations. Medicaid reimbursement records were used to establish the services delivered. Elevated-risk regions were classified as those where mothers had to commute more than 30 miles for parental treatment. They observed that most remote Michigan women have inadequate access to prenatal care. The outcomes could be used to focus on particular measures to increase these women’s access to medical care.

The American Hospitals Association (AHA) published a memorandum on behalf of its 5,000 member hospitals, 270,000 affiliate doctors, and over 2 million nurses to express their support for H.R. 4387. They argued that maternal health issues are a top priority for their members due to the country’s increased maternal morbidity and mortality rates. The bill would assist hospitals and healthcare systems in improving maternal health by financing programs that: develop and propagate clinical practices to improve maternal outcomes. The bill would also educate healthcare professionals in maternal care settings, improving health outcomes and reducing disparities.

York City speaker Adrienne E. Adams and the city’s council members applauded the signing into law of the maternal health legislation bill, which tackles significant inequities in maternal care like mortality and morbidity. According to Adams, maternal care is a social justice problem critical for several pregnant women in the state and country, particularly in Black neighborhoods. This traditionally diversified and female-majority council emphasized tackling this problem to lessen the enormous disparities in accessing fair treatment that African American, Hispanic, and native people suffer (New York City Council, 2022). The horrible encounters that have threatened many lives were recognized via tangible regulatory changes, and the passage of this legislation represents a significant step for the state.


The contemporary medical environment, which includes a slew of laws issued by government agencies, insurance providers, and organizations, presents difficulties for nurses and patients. These two parties are frequently caught between the repercussions of budget constraints and access to appropriate quality treatment. As nurses interact with their patients, they are typically the first experts to recognize the healthcare system’s flaws and how they influence care delivery. The Maternal Health Quality Improvement Act of 2021 aims to increase maternal health access for mothers living in rural regions, eliminating healthcare disparity in the United States. Policy advocacy positions provide nurses with a unique opportunity to make a difference and enjoy the satisfaction of contributing to a better healthcare system.


Cyr, M. E., Etchin, A. G., Guthrie, B. J., & Benneyan, J. C. (2019). Access to specialty healthcare in urban versus rural U.S. populations: a systematic literature review. BMC Health Services Research, 19(1).

Edmonson, C., McCarthy, C., Trent-Adams, S., McCain, C., & Marshall, J. (2017). Emerging Global Health Issues: A Nurse’s Role. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 22(1), 2.

Green, T. L., Zapata, J. Y., Brown, H. W., & Hagiwara, N. (2021). Rethinking Bias to Achieve Maternal Health Equity: Changing Organizations, Not Just Individuals. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 137(5), 935–940.

Kozhimannil, K. B., Hung, P., Henning-Smith, C., Casey, M. M., & Prasad, S. (2018). Association Between Loss of Hospital-Based Obstetric Services and Birth Outcomes in Rural Counties in the United States. JAMA, 319(12), 1239.

Kozhimannil, K. B., Interrante, J. D., Henning-Smith, C., & Admon, L. K. (2019). Rural-Urban Differences In Severe Maternal Morbidity And Mortality In The U.S., 2007–15. Health Affairs, 38(12), 2077–2085.

New York City Council. (2022, September 6). Speaker Adrienne Adams, First Women-Majority New York City Council Celebrate Signing of Maternal Health Bills into Law. Press.

Nidey, N., Tabb, K. M., Carter, K. D., Bao, W., Strathearn, L., Rohlman, D. S., Wehby, G., & Ryckman, K. (2019). Rurality and Risk of Perinatal Depression Among Women in the United States. The Journal of Rural Health.

Wendling, A., Taglione, V., Rezmer, R., Lwin, P., Frost, J., Terhune, J., & Kerver, J. (2021). Access to maternity and prenatal care services in rural Michigan. Birth.

Liberal Media Bias University Essay Example

How does society stay up to date with everything new? They depend on the media to inform them of the facts so they can make an informed opinion of their own. No matter how much people wish it were true, the media is only sometimes reliable. More significant effort is needed for society to obtain the truth from reliable media networks (Fan et al., 2019). People need to start fact-checking and examining various media sources to ensure they are receiving the truth rather than bias. The leading cause is that these biases might occasionally favour one political party over another. Numerous sources were consulted, and it appears that one political party is more well-known for media bias. Conservatives were most likely to perceive prejudice. In contrast to 44% of liberals and 50% of moderates, 78% of conservatives believe that the media is biased. Only about 36% of people think media coverage is “about right”.

There is little solid evidence concerning the ideological or politically driven liberal views of the many reporters who refuse to participate in surveys and identify as independent voters, as well as whether journalists’ political leanings affect the decision of which stories to cover that Americans invariably absorb, regardless of the fact that a preponderant large percentage of reporters identify as liberals/Democrats and so many Americans and government employees frequently denounce allegations to the contrary (Fan et al., 2019). By using a unique combination of data from journalists’ Twitter networks, voting patterns, a large-scale correspondence test, and a review of the related test, we prove that the media does not exhibit bias against conservatives (or liberals, for that issue) in the headlines that they choose to cover.

This reveals that the specific ideological affiliations of journalists have little bearing on the crucial but, as of yet, understudied early stage of political news generation. Ideological bias is the biggest concern Americans have with the mainstream media. Concerns about left-leaning media bias abound. Many Americans believe that liberal media bias is widespread and detrimental. 64% of Americans reported in a 2017 Gallup poll that they believed the media backed the Democratic Party, while 22% claimed the reverse. There is widespread concern about the leftist tilt in the mass press. It has even appeared on the platforms of town hall meetings and presidential debates. Political analysts and academics have talked about it concerning their assessments of the state of the news media (Lin et al., 2016). There are grounds for thinking that this point of view might be actual. Data suggests that journalists are more liberal than the general population. Given this, it is reasonable to assume that political ideology will significantly impact journalists’ opinions of what qualifies as relevant information. It is also possible that because the general public is psychologically wired to look for bias in the news, they misinterpret journalists’ ideological bent for the news they choose to report (Lin et al., 2016).

Media outlets frequently prefer Democrats more than Republicans. According to NBC, “the entire episode is part of a growing series of instances when the media appears prejudiced, whether intentionally or not, towards Republicans.” The NBC News Researchers from Texas A&M and Arizona State University conducted an interview study with 462 journalists from different newspaper firms (Lin et al., 2016). If they consider themselves very liberal, moderate, slightly liberal, or quite conservative, that was question. 40.84% of the journalists selected relatively liberal, while 17.63% selected very liberal. 37.12% of people identified as moderate. On the conservative side, 3.94% and 0.46% of respondents said they were somewhat and very conservative, respectively. “When you add it up, 58.47% acknowledge being left of centre,” said investors (Lin et al., 2016). Additionally, another 37.12% assert that they are “moderate.” (Investors) Calculating the conservative side results in an overall right-leaning percentage of 4.4%. Compared to journalists that lean left, that is more than 14 times less. These outlets present news to the public in a biased, left-leaning manner.

According to Siegfried (2018), media bias against conservatives is accurate, which is partly why no one trusts the media. According to this article, conservatives were understandably outraged when the USA Today editorial staff virtually identically echoed Barack Obama’s claim that his administration had been controversial at the conclusion of his term (Siegfried,2018). The line was replicated by numerous reporters, such as Tom Brokaw of NBC News, notwithstanding the Republican interrogations into, among other things, the IRS’s aiming of conservative groups, the ATF’s Fast and Furious program, and the Obama Administration’s federal assurances for Solyndra. In any case, this was completed by the editorial team of a national newspaper.

The media’s refusal to question Obama and its overly strong relationship with him was eloquently captured by their failure to mention serious scandals under Congress’ investigation. There is absolutely nothing improper with the White House press corps becoming cordial with a president or his advisers (these situations occur, mainly since they are in constant communication with one another). However, it exceeds the boundaries of journalistic credibility when that relationship affects reporters’ capacity to offer unbiased coverage and contest claims made by an administration (Siegfried,2018). They rightfully demand answers from Donald Trump, while some do so with too much zeal.

Whether intentional prejudice is involved, such actions do not increase conservatives’ trust in the media. They only serve to confirm the notion that, while professing to be impartial, the media works to protect its left-leaning allies and prosecute those on the right. This notion that conservative programs and conservatives, in general, are unfairly portrayed in the media by unapologetically leftist elites dates back decades to a time when newsrooms were more or less uniform in almost every respect (Siegfried,2018). Conservatives initially retaliated by starting their publications; after Watergate, in the heart of the Reagan administration, and amid liberals’ disdain for him, groups like the Media Research Center started cataloguing the countless instances of biased reporting, both great and little. There was a lot to document, from liberal-leaning opinion sections to reports and analysis that reads far more like the authors’ opinions than objective reporting (Siegfried,2018). Most Americans are starting to understand: Based on a recent Gallup study, 62 per cent of Americans perceive that the media is biased in its reporting, and 66 per cent of Americans think it is difficult for the media to distinguish between truth and opinion.

Despite evidence of conservative media bias, there is a considerably greater left-leaning bias in the media. These media outlets also employ various techniques to convey the version of the narrative they want society to hear. They can present bias by leaving out information, picking specific stories to tell, using spin, and in many other ways (Hassell et al., 2020). This study will highlight that the primary method of media bias delivery is information omission. This is evident in society’s most-watched news outlets, including CNN, MSNBC, and FOX. These frequently construct and broadcast a story that supports a liberal or conservative viewpoint but exclude details that would support the opposing viewpoint.

According to NBC, Democrats frequently think that the majority of the media is objective. Only 40% of Democrats agree that media sources are typically biased, compared to more than 70% of Republicans (Hassell et al., 2020). That is, more than half of those people trust the media in general. The risks associated with exposing people to media bias are mainly unknown in society. The facts presented help people make decisions about public policy, elections, and other topics. As citizens of the United States, they have the right to receive information and make their own decisions.


Siegfried (2018). NBC News. Media bias against conservatives is real and part of why no one trusts the news now.

Hassell, H. J., Holbein, J. B., & Miles, M. R. (2020). There is no liberal media bias in which news stories political journalists choose to cover. Science advances6(14), eaay9344.

Fan, L., White, M., Sharma, E., Su, R., Choubey, P. K., Huang, R., & Wang, L. (2019). In plain sight: Media bias through the lens of factual reporting. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.02670.

Lin, M. C., Haridakis, P. M., & Hanson, G. (2016). The role of political identity and media selection on perceptions of hostile media bias during the 2012 presidential campaign. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media60(3), 425-447.

Medical Resonance Imaging (MRI) Writing Sample

Medical resonance imaging is a technique used in medical imaging to form different pictures of the physiological process and the body’s anatomy. The medical resonance imaging scanners use the strong magnetic fields, radio waves and the strong magnetic gradients to create these images from the body’s organs. The MRIs have different uses and associated risks since they use strong radiation; hence, they need some training to use them.

The MRI machine produces a strong magnetic field around the patient. This magnetic field induces an electric current in the body’s cells, causing them to become slightly magnetized (Anzai et al., 2019). When the MRI machine emits radio frequency pulses, the cells respond by producing a tiny amount of energy that is then detected by the MRI scanner, allowing the machine to create detailed three-dimensional images. These images can be used to diagnose and monitor various medical conditions.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is a non-invasive medical imaging technique that produces detailed images of the body’s organs, tissues, and other structures. It is used to diagnose and monitor various medical conditions, including cancer, heart and vascular diseases, musculoskeletal injuries, and neurological disorders (Nassar et al., 2021). The MRI differs from computed tomography (CT), in that they do not use the damaging ionizing radiation of x-rays. RI can also be used for pre-operative planning and post-operative follow-up, providing detailed images of the body’s soft tissues. MRI scans are also used for therapeutic purposes, such as to guide the placement of needles during biopsies, or to focus radiation therapy on a tumour. In addition, MRI scans can be used to compare the effectiveness of various treatments.

MRI is a powerful imaging tool, but it has some risks. The most significant risk is the potential for an allergic reaction to the contrast dye used in some MRI scans. Other risks include claustrophobia, feeling dizzy or nauseous during the scan, burns from the magnetic field, and hearing loss due to the loud noises created by the machine. In rare cases, an MRI scan can cause a stroke or interfere with medical devices such as pacemakers. You must speak to your doctor about potential risks and follow their instructions carefully.

MRI training is important in learning how to use this technology safely and effectively. Training can be done in various ways, including on-site and online courses. On-site training is usually provided by the facility where the MRI is located and can cover topics such as safety, imaging techniques, patient positioning, and scanner maintenance. Online courses are also available and can provide a comprehensive overview of MRI technology and its applications (Ogbole et al., 2018). MRI training is essential for anyone working with MRI technology to ensure the safety of patients, staff, and equipment.

The career outlook for MRI technicians is very positive. MRI technicians are in high demand in hospitals, clinics, imaging centres and other medical facilities worldwide. The increasing use of MRI technology in diagnosing and treating diseases has created a need for highly-trained MRI technicians to operate MRI machines and produce quality images. With the right training and experience, MRI technicians can expect to have secure employment with competitive salaries.

The salary of MRI technicians can vary based on experience, location, and other factors. Generally, MRI technicians can expect to earn an average annual salary of around $68,000. Those with more experience can expect to earn even higher salaries. In some locations, salaries may be even higher due to increased demand for MRI technicians. Additionally, many employers offer bonuses and other incentives to MRI technicians.

MRI has brought about major changes in how physicians and radiologists diagnose and treat diseases. MRI has numerous advantages over traditional imaging methods such as X-rays, CT scans and ultrasound. MRI offers a much higher resolution and clarity than other imaging methods. MRI can provide detailed anatomical images of the entire body and detect even the smallest abnormalities. MRI can also detect subtle changes in tissues and organs, which can be difficult to detect using other imaging methods. This is especially useful in diagnosing diseases such as cancer and other abnormalities. In addition, MRI scans can detect changes in blood flow, which can be very useful in diagnosing stroke, heart conditions and other diseases.

MRI is highly marketable because it provides detailed images and diagnostics of the body’s internal systems. It is used by hospitals, clinics and other medical facilities worldwide to diagnose and treat various medical conditions. MRI is also used in research, development, and industrial and scientific applications. As technology continues to develop and improve, MRI marketability will only strengthen.

In conclusion, MRI has revolutionized the medical imaging industry and has had a huge impact on the future of radiography. MRI is a powerful tool that offers high-resolution images, is non-invasive and can detect subtle changes in tissue and organs. This technology has made it possible to diagnose and treat diseases more accurately and safely and has greatly improved the quality of care available to patients.


Anzai, Y., Minoshima, S., & Lee, V. S. (2019). I am enhancing the value of MRI: a call for action. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging49(7), e40-e48.

Nassar, S. E., Mohamed, M. A. E. A., & Elnakib, A. (2021). MRI Brain Tumor Segmentation Using Deep Learning. (Dept. E). MEJ. Mansoura Engineering Journal45(4), 45-54.

Ogbole, G. I., Adeyomoye, A. O., Badu-Peprah, A., Mensah, Y., & Nzeh, D. A. (2018). Survey of magnetic resonance imaging availability in West Africa. The Pan African Medical Journal30.