Create a PowerPoint presentation of a nursing practice ethical dilemma. See the following re: Owl
Designing an Effective PPT*:
https://onedrive.live.com/View.aspx?resid=9E1D26621EA2350E!648&wdSlideId=304&wdModeSwitch
Time=1657396806717&authkey=!APQbx1pOFCBkgmM
Presentation must be limited to 5 slides (excluding references) that reflect the following:
1. A clear definition (with citation) of the concept ‘nursing practice’ ethical dilemma (20%).
2. A detailed nursing practice ‘scenario’ that reflects a dilemma (i.e., “caught between a rock and a hard
place”). Ensure that the scenario is consistent with the definition presented in item #1 above as well as
reflect the practice role of the nurse (vs the physician) (e.g., the nurse does not, generally, order blood
transfusion). Clearly 1) state the nursing practice standard/law/employer guideline/ANA Code of Ethics,
etc. presented in the scenario and the nursing practice standard/law/employer guideline, etc. presented in
the scenario that is in opposition to the former (as this is the nursing practice dilemma). Clearly state the
dilemma in one bold highlighted sentence. Clearly identify peer-reviewed, published literature (i.e.,
journal article, ANA Codes of Ethics, etc.) that supports each of the opposing standards/laws/employer
guidelines, etc. described in the scenario. (Any evidence that the created scenario was plagiarized from a
google search for nursing ethical dilemmas will result in a zero grade for this assignment. (25%).
3. A clear presentation of support for each (pro and con) position related to the dilemma with references
for both. Use one or more ANA Codes of Ethics to support one position and at least two peer-reviewed
literature references as the basis of support for the alternate position (25%).
4 of 8
4. A clear identification of “your” group’s concluding position regarding the dilemma and at least one
ethics theory (e.g., rights, utilitarianism, teleology, deontology, etc.) that best supports your decision
(ensure that the relationship between your conclusion and the specific theory is clear) (25%).
5. At least 4 peer-reviewed references (no Wikipedia) (5%).
