Nursing Diagnosis At The HOPE Rehabilitation Center Essay Sample For College

Target Population

This program targets women and children from the HOPE rehabilitation centre. A total of 30 women shall be recruited with the help of the rehab’s nurses. The women are aged between 16 and 35 years and they have small children. The targeted women hail from the local Foxford community as well as foreigners. Given that the rehab accepts people from different cultural and religious backgrounds, the target population shall be composed of the Americans, African Americans, and Asians. Young mothers in the rehab rarely have access to the necessary healthcare information, and this aspect explains why they are chosen for this study.

Social Determinants of Health

Various environmental and social factors influence the health of women. The social factors that are likely to affect the effectiveness of this program include

  1. Literacy levels
  2. Income and social status
  3. Addiction
  4. Chronic stress
  5. The environment

The level of education of the target population influences a person’s ability to understand the health information. On the other hand, income influences the feeding habits of the person in question. In most countries in the world, women earn less than men hence they are vulnerable to malnutrition. Next, drug and substance abuse affects the mental health of the victim thus diminishing his/her ability to deal with his/her health. Stress predisposes a person to other health conditions such as diabetes and heart illnesses. Women are more likely to be affected by stress than men due to their low income.

Community Partner Overview

The program shall be accomplished in collaboration with the HOPE rehabilitation centre. The rehab is located in Foxford, County Mayo, Ireland with its vision being to assist drug victims to recover from addiction. The rehab combines the following forms of treatment – CBT, mindfulness, fitness, and the evidence-based recovery program. The rehab serves people from the UK, Hong Kong, Singapore, Asia, Australia, USA, Canada, and Europe.

Assessment Findings

The nurses conducted interviews with women from the HOPE HOUSE rehabilitation centre to find out their perception about health. The interviews were conducted before the intervention to determine the areas to be covered in the program. The survey reviewed that 70% of the women are not aware of the healthy child rearing practices. An interview with a nurse from the rehab confirmed that women in the institution do not access health information. The nurse claimed that the rehab was only mandated to deter drug and substance abuse.

Priority Nursing Diagnosis

As indicated earlier in this paper, a survey was conducted in the HOPE HOUSE rehab centre. The survey targeted women aged between 16 and 35 years residing in the rehab. The survey found that women did not have access to the relevant health information thus leading to poor personal health. Besides, the inadequacy of health information caused high mortality rates among children.

Intervention Plan. Weeks 7-14

The intervention shall take place in 7 weeks in which the target population shall receive health education. The first week shall revolve around examining the population to get insight on their knowledge regarding their personal health as well as the children’s health. The 8th week shall be used to enlighten the community about the importance of such information. In week 9, the team shall impart knowledge to the women about their personal health.

Week 10 shall be used to apprise the women about the issues presented by pregnancy. The common diseases such diabetes, hypertension, and HIV/AIDS shall be covered in details in this week. During the 11th week, the participants shall be enlightened on the importance of their children’s health. Additionally, the women shall be educated on the appropriate ways of ensuring that their kids remain healthy.

Week 13 shall summarize the learning from week 1 to refresh the participants’ mind. All the topics covered from the beginning to the end of the session shall be discussed briefly. Week 14 shall centre on the assessment of the participants’ understanding of the previous sessions. The participants shall be assessed on the following aspects – understanding of the lessons and the importance of the intervention and the impact of the intervention to the mothers.

Connection to Healthy People 2020

One of the objectives of the 2020 health goals is to improve the health of women and children. The aim of the developmental goals is to achieve zero maternal deaths around the globe by the year 2020. The achievement of the stated goal is highly dependent on the women’s knowledge and ability to take care of their health and that of their children. Equipping women with the relevant information regarding their children’s health may be a major boost to the achievement of the goals.

Connection to Public Health Concepts

The intervention availed by this program aims at equipping women with the right information about their personal health coupled with their children’s health. Pregnancy presents an opportunity for nurses to identify the various health risks such as diabetes, hypertension, sexually transmitted illnesses, and genetic conditions among others. Such health conditions may cause an increase in child mortality rates if not detected in time.

The Minnesota Department of Health and the department of the Public Health at large have an obligation to mitigate child mortality rates. To achieve this objective, they must educate the mothers about their children’s health. Nurses are better positioned to offer the relevant information to the clients due to their direct contact with them. The interaction between them and the mothers creates a personal relationship that may favor exchange of important information. Mothers have a big role to play in the promotion of women’s health. Therefore, nurses are obliged to offer the relevant information to the clients to help lower child deaths.

Evaluation Plan

During the 14th week, the nurses shall assess the effectiveness of the program by requiring the participants to cite the main themes of the intervention. The intervention shall be deemed effective if the participants are in a position to explain the topics with ease. A questionnaire shall be used to conduct the evaluation. The participants shall be assessed using questions drawn from the lessons.

Feedback to students

This presentation revolves around a proposed intervention on women in the HOPE HOUSE rehabilitation centre. The intervention seeks to educate women about their personal health coupled with the health of their children. The proposal is informed by the view that the high child mortality rates are largely caused by the inadequacy of health information among mothers. A survey conducted on the participants revealed that 70% of women do not have much knowledge regarding their health and that of their kids.

The main strength of this project is that it targets women in a rehab centre who are prone to other social issues such as substance abuse and stress that may influence their health. The shortfalls include the study population being too small and the lack of adequate resources.

Analysis Of The Personal Data Legislation


These days, businesses have access to their customers’ data; consequently, this creates tremendous opportunities for analysis and forecasting and introduces personal data breach risks. The development of public opinion and legislation in privacy result in intentions to create regulations for personal data’s ethical use. There is no systematic regulation of the right to private information protection at the national level in the United States. The European approach is most precisely expressed in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The European concept of regulating personal data management is based on preventing excessive control over a person’s private life, either by state institutions or by corporations. In this Case Analysis, I will argue that the ethical matrix shows us that the United States should not follow Europe’s lead because it might affect the country’s economic health. It is mainly built on collecting, processing, and using vast amounts of data; and to solve the problem of privacy, the United States government needs to develop its unique approach that considers all stakeholders’ interests.

Zimmer Concept

The most significant challenge with open data is its privacy. According to Zimmer (2018), publicly available data can also be private. For example, the topic of information sharing was addressed in 2016, when a Danish researcher released a dataset of information extracted from 70,000 user profiles on the OkCupid dating site (Sharma, 2019). Due to the provided details, it was possible to establish persons’ identities (Sharma, 2019). The data included potentially sensitive information such as username, age, gender, geographic location, personality traits, and responses to thousands of questions from the site’s survey (Sharma, 2019). The data was publicly available, and therefore, it was completely free to use this information or share it.

Zimmer was one of several privacy and ethics scholars who have criticized this position. Zimmer’s concept is that having “one’s personal information stripped from the intended sphere of the social networking profile and amassed into a database for external review becomes an affront to the subjects’ human dignity and their ability to control the flow of their personal information” (Zimmer, 2018, p. 6). Zimmer discussed in detail how deanonymization became possible and what risks arise from such situations. The key ones violate privacy and inappropriate handling of private information, unfair storage, and dataset errors (Zimmer, 2018). His questions stem from traditional values for Western culture at the beginning of the 21st century – privacy and a distinction between the personal and the public (Zimmer, 2018). This is important since the private and the general differentiation on both the democratic way of government and social norms. After this case, many social media began to restrict researchers’ access to their information, and researchers confirmed and changed ethical codes.

In the United States, freedom of information, freedom of commerce, and public safety are fundamental. For adhering to the values, the state allows complete access to citizens’ data compared to Europe. On the one hand, the US has a robust journalistic community and the non-profit sector; on the other, significant freedom in data use. Regarding the example of the new privacy law, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) appeals across different sectors of the economy (Pardau, 2018). It provides substantial subject data rights, including the right to delete information, and introduces new responsibilities for companies (Pardau, 2018). Similar to the European GDPR, the CCPA applies to a wide variety of companies, not just California-based companies (Pardau, 2018). It also concerns restrictions on the processing, using, and disclosing private data.

The ethical matrix helps to evaluate this approach from the perspective of several principles such as autonomy, fairness, and well-being of each interest group. However, in practice, regulation is complicated because it is difficult to strike a balance between overregulation, which will reduce the quality of the services provided, and insufficient protection of citizens’ rights (Pardau, 2018). It is difficult for governments to control IT companies as long as the benefits of violating the law far exceed the damage from potential lawsuits (Pardau, 2018). For instance, the US Federal Trade Commission forced Facebook to change its privacy policy, but this did not affect the previous surveillance business model’s operation (Pardau, 2018). Widespread surveillance has become possible in part precisely because the United States has a hands-off policy.

Buchanan Concept

The global collection of data available is limited by the local context and individual understanding of the private and public boundaries on the Internet. According to Markham and Buchanan (2017), people understand the degree of publicity of the information posted, but using it in different circumstances can result in adverse outcomes. According to Samuel and Buchanan (2020), all ethical principles attempt to maximize benefits and minimize negative effects regardless of discipline. Therefore, research ethics requires that all participants need to give open, informed permission.

All big-data research conducted by multiple IT companies should answer issues that will benefit humanity. Each potential study participant should know the reasons the research is being undertaken, the duration, and the methods being utilized (Samuel & Buchanan, 2020). Moreover, it is essential to give full information about whether users have the right to refuse to join or leave the research at any moment (Samuel & Buchanan, 2020). Furthermore, the details such as the possible risks or benefits, limits of confidentiality.

The company should clearly explain what user data it collects, the reasons, and ways it will be managed. According to Samuel and Buchanan (2020), the company should only collect data that is consistent with its stated goals. As long as data collection purposes have changed but continue to be used, this can be a violation. However, Markham and Buchanan (2017) emphasize that “researchers must balance subjects’ rights as authors, as research participants, as people with the social benefits of research and researchers’ rights to conduct research” (p. 207). Ethical issues may occur and require discussion throughout all the research process stages, starting from preparation, study performance, publication, and distribution (Markham & Buchanan, 2017). However, the study of persons’ private information does not necessarily involve manipulation. It might become a useful tool for understanding user behavior and improving digital products and services.

Concerning new policy law, the current situation demands increasing responsibility of the United States IT companies. The business and the technology community should pay more attention to user data privacy and loyalty to American and European requirements regulators and authorities (Solove & Schwartz, 2020). These days, representatives of IT companies declare their willingness to cooperate with lawmakers to achieve a balance of interests (Solove & Schwartz, 2020). They express their readiness to rethink service security approaches and make technical product changes to strengthen users’ protection.

Regarding the ethical matrix, this agreement between the provider and a person benefits both parties. The former can still process, aggregate profiles, and analyze personal data in business development interests. Therefore, customers should have the right to know the ways, addresses, and reasons for providing personal information (Solove & Schwartz, 2020). For instance, there is a project addressing the interests of all stakeholders. Business Software Alliance (BSA) forms a project that includes the following principles: transparency, purpose specification, informed choice, data quality, consumer control, security (Rider, 2018). It also intends to facilitate data for legitimate business interests, considering accountability, compliance with law and order, and international interoperability (Rider, 2018). Companies are obliged to provide information on third parties who use it and the opportunity to correct personal data if necessary and request its deletion.


Ethics regarding privacy laws refers to computer and information issues. It covers topics such as the participant’s knowledge and permission, data integrity, protection, confidentiality and accuracy of the information, intellectual property issues. Personal data legislation builds relationships between several interest groups such as individuals, companies, and mediators. The concepts are the same in almost all countries as they are based on citizens’ rights to anonymity and inviolability of private life. In the United States, companies cannot anticipate and overcome all ethical risks. Nevertheless, they need to improve their privacy policy and take responsibility for data control and digital services as a priority for the future. In case the US Congress assumes that the developing national legislation on online privacy cannot obstruct innovation, the new privacy policy can be beneficial. Thus, at the latest stage of legislative regulation of ensuring the protection of personal data, the government should focus on adopting rules regarding all interest groups.


Markham, A., & Buchanan, E. (2017). Research ethics in context: Decision-making in digital research. In M. T. Schäfer & K. van Es (Eds.), The datafied society: Studying culture through data (pp. 201–209). Amsterdam University Press.

Pardau, S. L. (2018). The California Consumer Privacy Act: Towards a European-style privacy regime in the United States. Journal of Technology Law & Policy, 23(68), 69-113.

Samuel, G., & Buchanan, E. (2020). Guest editorial: Ethical issues in social media research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: JERHRE, 15(1-2), 3-11. 

Sharma, S. (2019). Data privacy and GDPR handbook. John Wiley & Sons.

Solove, D. J., & Schwartz, P. M. (2020). Privacy, law enforcement, and national security. Aspen Publishers.

Samuel, G., & Buchanan, E. (2020). Guest editorial: Ethical issues in social media research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: JERHRE, 15(1-2), 3-11. 

Zimmer, M. (2018). Addressing conceptual gaps in big data research ethics: An application of contextual integrity. Social Media+ Society, 4(2), 1-11. 

Pot For Pain: Medical Marijuana For Veterans


The question of legalizing marijuana is an urgent issue. The representatives of the US government, both Republicans and Democrats, have already established their positions in regards to removing barriers to scientific research and allowing marijuana to be used by veterans for medical purposes. Due to Republican behaviors and attitudes, an amendment to a bill that would support the medical use of marijuana by veterans was blocked (Gaffey). Democrats demonstrated their dissatisfaction with the results and their disappointment at the inability to offer marijuana as a pain reliever and as a possible medication for post-traumatic stress disorder. Both types of statements may be supported and understood because their claims are the “things that are either true or false” (Vaughn 9). People can make mistakes, but they should be ready to defend their positions. This paper argues that the idea of medical marijuana for veterans should be pursued and encouraged by the US government and society only in cases where patients are under the supervision of medical experts and diagnosed with PTSD or have pain symptoms that cannot be effectively treated with other medications.

Lack of Evidence

Recent clinical trials and medical cases which aim at evaluating the effectiveness of medical marijuana do not provide definitive evidence, leaving this issue controversial and open to discussion. For example, “the use of marijuana should be legal because it’s an act that brings pleasure to people’s lives” (Vaughn 85). However, such statements can provoke the development of new statements like the necessity to legalize all activities and actions which make people happier. The legalization of marijuana is a serious issue in the United States. At this moment, only 29 states and Washington, DC have legalized marijuana, proving that a certain part of the US population is not ready for medical marijuana. There are still risks and threats from using marijuana, including negative impacts on short-term memory, lung tissue damage, a high potential for abuse, homelessness, imprisonment, or even suicide (Gaffey). Because of such uncertainty and the controversial nature of the marijuana discussion, it is hard to prove the correctness of one approach and disprove the validity of another position. Vaughn admits that though such “premise is actually controversial in some quarters… it…is not obviously false” (85). This discussion will focus not on medical cases and trials but on understanding attitudes toward medical marijuana as a treatment solution for veterans who have put their lives at risk to protect every citizen of the United States and the idea of freedom.

Wrong Interpretations of Medical Marijuana

The term ‘medical marijuana’ is not legally accepted in all states of America, a situation that might be explained due to the absence of a clear and definite definition of the term. To support their position, US government representatives usually use such basic concepts as a treatment option, pain reliever, control, and abuse. To avoid misunderstandings and confusion, medical marijuana may refer to an unprocessed plant, or to its extract that is used to relieve pain and treat the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Veterans are subject to different types of disorders, including PTSD, panic, social phobias, anxiety, and sleeping problems. Marijuana is a chance to improve the quality of veterans’ lives, and it should be used under the direction of a medical expert. Still, there is no need for “a rush to judgment” (Vaughn 83). Each idea and each definition should be properly placed to develop a strong and effective discussion on the chosen topic.

Marijuana for Veterans

Attitudes toward marijuana use as a medication for veterans to treat their disorders may depend on the presence or absence of research evidence. “There simply may not be enough evidence to rationally decide” (Vaughn 10). Scientific studies of the chemical composition of marijuana are limited, but the federal government has tried to remove this barrier and for medical purposes (Gaffey). At this moment, there are no large-scale trials which might be able to prove the risks or benefits of medical marijuana. A possibility to be “involved in the controversy” is a good method to develop discussions and find out the truth (Vaughn 64). There is one group of people who believe that marijuana brings nothing but harm and dependence. Patients who start using marijuana for medical purposes observe new symptoms and behavioral changes and put the blame on marijuana as the source of their new problems, their encountering unavoidable complications, or the necessity to deal with new social problems. Another group of people is able to expand their imagination and theoretical basis and accept marijuana as one possible medication. Marijuana emerges as a chance to reduce the level of pain or to cope with the consequences of post-traumatic stress disorder. It might have side effects and lead to abuse. However, every single medication has a list of side effects, contraindications, and requirements. Patients should follow the prescriptions and be careful while taking drugs.

As soon as people gather enough evidence, they are able to “make an intelligent decision” and demonstrate their attitude towards a topic (Vaughn 10). Marijuana may be considered as a type of drug that has its proper dosage and known side effects, and medical workers have to take care of veterans who have been prescribed marijuana as their primary medication. Medical marijuana for veterans may be approved in case three main steps are taken, including diagnosis (post-traumatic stress disorder), the selection of a nurse to follow up on the process of taking the medication, and a determination of the inappropriateness of other drugs to achieve the same results (pain relief) that can be obtained by taking marijuana.

Diagnosis and Medical Marijuana

The first decision that should be made to support the access of veterans to marijuana for medical purposes is based on a properly obtained diagnosis. Post-traumatic stress disorder is a problem for many American veterans. When they return home and interact with a local hospital, they discover that ordinary activities and words do not lead to the expected outcome. A new treatment is required, and new help has to be offered. This type of stress disorder occurs after veterans experience military conflicts, terrorist attacks, serious health problems, or sexual assault. Six out of 10 men and 5 out of 10 women experience a degree of trauma during their military service. They have to learn how to live with their experience, and their PTSD may take different forms, which may require different treatment approaches.

Their decisions should be supported by “good reasons” and strong evidence (Vaughn 7). For example, the investigations of the American Legion, one of the largest wartime veterans associations in the United States, show that more than 6 million lives were saved during the period between 2012 and 2013 after the patients were prescribed with opioids (Gaffey). Such statement is a good premise “given in support of another statement” that marijuana legalization is still a doubtful idea (Vaughn 11). The task of medicine is to save lives, and the task of the government is to provide medical organizations with rights and powers so that they can perform their functions. PTSD is a health problem for which medical experts will have access to all treatment possibilities only after a governmental decision to legalize marijuana as a medical option.

Medical Responsibility for Marijuana

Another important issue in the promotion of medical marijuana for veterans is the choice of people to take responsibility for the outcomes and the process of taking the medication. It is not enough to select a person and make them responsible for all positive and negative cases of marijuana usage. A professional nurse should know how to cooperate with a patient, in this case a veteran, educate, and define all aspects of treatment to explain why marijuana treatment causes such controversy. A medical expert has to control the usage of marijuana and report on any change that can be observed. To use this idea to support marijuana legalization, it is necessary not “confuse explanations with arguments” (Vaughn 14). In this discussion, the task is to support and use personal knowledge but not to explain and prove an idea theoretically. Marijuana can be safe and helpful if it is taken under qualified medical supervision and with properly given explanations and lessons.

Medical Marijuana as an Alternative

Finally, to be confident that marijuana is a good medical solution for veterans, it is necessary to make sure that no other options can help. Marijuana is still a Schedule I controlled substance (Gaffey). Drugs of this type are considered dangerous for people because they cause abuse and therefore have tight restrictions. In 2016, 66,000 ex-servicemen and women were treated for opioid addictions that were linked to such social problems as prison, homelessness, and suicide (Gaffey). Marijuana can be an alternative, a kind of a “competing theory” that makes sense (Vaughn 45). With its help, veterans can avoid these problems and improve the quality of their lives while dealing with PTSD. It may not be possible to use marijuana for treating serious diseases and health defects. PTSD is a type of disorder that often cannot be survived alone. People must be supported emotionally, psychologically, and medically. The medical marijuana option should be available to veterans not to withhold from them an opportunity to survive the psychological consequences of what they had to observe during their military service.


Traumatic memories are a significant part of veterans’ lives. People with PTSD have to deal with numerous challenges and use their experience at home or in the workplace. PTSD is a disorder that makes a human life harder than it already is, and people should be provided with a possibility to be treated for PTSD. The medical value of marijuana remains controversial in the United States. Republicans do not find it necessary to legalize marijuana for medical purposes, even if they are aware of the possibility of improving people’s lives. The opinions of Democrats are not enough because there are still many people who do not have enough evidence for the positive medical aspects of marijuana. If “there are only two alternatives to consider when there are actually more than two” in this discussion, such fallacy leads to a false dilemma (Vaughn 189). In this paper, the task is not to explain why marijuana should be legalized and available to all American citizens. The goal is rather to show that the available information is enough to prove that veterans deserve the right to use marijuana under the direction of a medical expert as a treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder when no other options are possible.

Work Cited

Gaffey, Conor. “Pot for Pain: Medical Marijuana for Veterans Blocked as Republicans Shoot Down Bill, but It Could Still Happen.” Newsweek. 2017, Web.

Vaughn, Lewis. The Power of Critical Thinking. 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, 2008.

error: Content is protected !!