Rubric Detail

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.

Content

Name: NRNP_6675_Week8_Assignment_Rubric

• Grid View
• List View

Show Descriptions Show Feedback

In 2–3 pages, address the following:

• Explain your state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult psychiatric emergencies. Include who can hold a patient and for how long, who can release the emergency hold, and who can pick up the patient after a hold is released.

— Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response includes a thorough and well-organized explanation of student's state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. Good 80%–89% 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response includes an accurate explanation of student's state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. Fair 70%–79% 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The response includes a somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of student's state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of student's state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. Or the response is missing. Feedback:

• Explain the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. Good 80%–89% 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response includes a well-organized explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. Fair 70%–79% 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The response includes a somewhat vague explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response includes a vague explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. Or the response is missing. Feedback:

• Explain the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 9 (9%) – 10 (10%) The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. Good 80%–89% 8 (8%) – 8 (8%) The response includes an accurate explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. Fair 70%–79% 7 (7%) – 7 (7%) The response includes a somewhat vague or incomplete explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 6 (6%) The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. Or the response is missing. Feedback:

• Select one of the following topics and explain one legal issue and one ethical issue related to this topic that may apply within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies: patient autonomy, EMTALA, confidentiality, HIPAA privacy rule, HIPAA security rule, protected information, legal gun ownership, career obstacles (security clearances/background checks), and payer source.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response accurately and concisely explains one legal and one ethical issue related to the selected topic, within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies. Good 80%–89% 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response accurately explains one legal and one ethical issue related to the selected topic, within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies. Fair 70%–79% 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The response somewhat vaguely or innacurately explains one legal and one ethical issue related to the selected topic, within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The response vaguely or innacurately explains one legal and one ethical issue related to the selected topic, within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies. Or, response is missing. Feedback:

•Identify one evidence-based suicide risk assessment that you could use to screen patients. Attach a copy or a link to the assessment you identified.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response identifies and explains an appropriate, evidence-based suicide risk assessment that could be used to screen patients. A copy of or a link to the assessment is included. Good 80%–89% 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response identifies an appropriate, evidence-based suicide risk assessment that could be used to screen patients. A copy of or a link to the assessment is included. Fair 70%–79% 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The risk assessment identified is somewhat inappropriate for the intended use or dated. A copy of or a link to the assessment may be missing. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The risk assessment identified is inappropriate for the intended use, not evidence based, or dated. Or, response is missing. Feedback:

• Identify one evidence-based violence risk assessment that you could use to screen patients. Attach a copy or a link to the assessment you identified.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 14 (14%) – 15 (15%) The response identifies and explains an appropriate, evidence-based violence risk assessment that could be used to screen patients. A copy of or a link to the assessment is included. Good 80%–89% 12 (12%) – 13 (13%) The response identifies an appropriate, evidence-based violence risk assessment that could be used to screen patients. A copy of or a link to the assessment is included. Fair 70%–79% 11 (11%) – 11 (11%) The risk assessment identified is somewhat inappropriate for the intended use or dated. A copy of or a link to the assessment may be missing. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 10 (10%) The risk assessment identified is inappropriate for the intended use, not evidence based, or dated. Or, response is missing. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – Paragraph Development and Organization:

Paragraphs make clear points that support well-developed ideas, flow logically, and demonstrate continuity of ideas. Sentences are carefully focused—neither long and rambling nor short and lacking substance. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement and introduction are provided that delineate all required criteria.

— Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity. A clear and comprehensive purpose statement, introduction, and conclusion are provided that delineate all required criteria. Good 80%–89% 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 80% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are stated, yet they are brief and not descriptive. Fair 70%–79% 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity 60%–79% of the time. Purpose, introduction, and conclusion of the assignment are vague or off topic. Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Paragraphs and sentences follow writing standards for flow, continuity, and clarity < 60% of the time. No purpose statement, introduction, or conclusion were provided. Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – English writing standards:

Correct grammar, mechanics, and proper punctuation

— Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation with no errors Good 80%–89% 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains 1-2 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Fair 70%–79% 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3-4 grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains five or more grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors that interfere with the reader’s understanding Feedback:

Written Expression and Formatting – The paper follows correct APA format for title page, headings, font, spacing, margins, indentations, page numbers, parenthetical/in-text citations, and reference list.–

Levels of Achievement: Excellent 90%–100% 5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Uses correct APA format with no errors Good 80%–89% 4 (4%) – 4 (4%) Contains 1-2 APA format errors Fair 70%–79% 3.5 (3.5%) – 3.5 (3.5%) Contains 3-4 APA format errors Poor 0%–69% 0 (0%) – 3 (3%) Contains five or more APA format errors Feedback:

Name: NRNP_6675_Week8_Assignment_Rubric

,

PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AS INDICATED BELOW:

,

Assignment: Legal and Ethical Issues Related to Psychiatric Emergencies

The diagnosis of psychiatric emergencies can include a wide range of problems—from serious drug reactions to abuse and suicidal ideation/behaviors. Regardless of care setting, the PMHNP must know how to address emergencies, coordinate care with other members of the health care team and law enforcement officials (when indicated), and effectively communicate with family members who are often overwhelmed in emergency situations. In their role, PMHNPs can ensure a smooth transition from emergency mental health care to follow-up care, and also bridge the physical–mental health divide in healthcare.

In this week’s Assignment, you explore legal and ethical issues surrounding psychiatric emergencies, and identify evidence-based suicide and violence risk assessments. 

To Prepare

· Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide about psychiatric emergencies and the ethical and legal issues surrounding these events.

The Assignment

In 2–3 pages, address the following:

· Explain your state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult psychiatric emergencies. Include who can hold a patient and for how long, who can release the emergency hold, and who can pick up the patient after a hold is released.

· Explain the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state.

· Explain the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts.

· Select one of the following topics, and explain one legal issue and one ethical issue related to this topic that may apply within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies: patient autonomy, EMTALA, confidentiality, HIPAA privacy rule, HIPAA security rule, protected information, legal gun ownership, career obstacles (security clearances/background checks), and payer source.

· Identify one evidence-based suicide risk assessment that you could use to screen patients.

· Identify one evidence-based violence risk assessment that you could use to screen patients.

PLEASE TAKE NOTE BELOW:

To Submit the Assignment: Attach copies of or links to the suicide and violence risk assessments you selected.

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.