NURS 6050 Week 1 Discussion: Presidential Agendas

NURS 6050 Week 1 Discussion: Presidential Agendas

NURS 6050 Presidential Agendas

The opioid epidemic remains a national public health issue because of the effects it has had on patients and health population. According to federal records or statistics, over 760,000 individuals have lost their lives since 1999. Again, close to 75% of drug overdose mortalities in 2020 entail opioid Jones et al., 20. Imperatively, tackling this crisis has always attracted the attention from presidential candidates who institute different approaches to show their commitment to its elimination. Social determinants of health play a core role in influencing opioid use among different population (Lyden et al., 2019). For instance, education, income levels, neighborhood aspects and housing stability are some of the social determinants that impact opioid use disorder Albright. These determinants mean that individuals can access opioids. These factors also determine one’s perception and use of health care services, especially those suffering from it negative effects. The implication is that individuals from low-income families and low levels of education is vulnerable to opioid use since they cannot afford better access to health care services. Neighborhood also impact vulnerability to opioid epidemic as individuals from poor areas are susceptible to these drugs.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
NURS 6050 Week 1 Discussion: Presidential Agendas
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

The two recent presidents have handled this issue differently, mainly due to their political ideologies and need to stump one’s authority. The current president, Joe Biden, has expanded access to treatment for opioid epidemic. The Biden administration considers the opioid epidemic a grave national issue. Imperatively, the administration continues to improve access to mental health and other related services to ensure that it tackles the epidemic (Rangachari et al., 2022). The Trump administration has also tackled the issue of opioid by increasing allocations to areas and departments charged with the responsibility of dealing with infectious disease. As demonstrated by the two presidents, ensuring access to their pasture is important for cows.

References

Albright, D. L., Johnson, K., Laha-Walsh, K., McDaniel, J., & McIntosh, S. (2021). Social

determinants of opioid use among patients in rural primary care settings. Social Work in

            Public Health, 36(6), 723-731.

Jones, G. H., Bruera, E., Abdi, S., & Kantarjian, H. M. (2019). The opioid epidemic in the

United States—overview, origins, and potential solutions. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey, 74(5), 278-279.

Lyden, J., & Binswanger, I. A. (2019, April). The united states opioid epidemic. In Seminars in

            Perinatology, 43(3):123-131).

Rangachari, P., Govindarajan, A., Mehta, R., Seehusen, D., & Rethemeyer, R. K. (2022). The

relationship between Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) and death from cardiovascular disease or opioid use in counties across the United States (2009–2018). BMC public health, 22(1), 236. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-12653-8

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Presidential Agendas

Rather than focus on the treatment of chronic disease, policies that influence population health tend to emphasize prevention and wellness; the reduction or elimination of waste and the eradication of health disparities based on race, ethnicity, language, income, gender, sexual orientation, disability and other factors. The reasoning is that good health belongs to the whole, not just an individual. (New York State Dept. of Health, n.d.)

Regardless of political affiliation, every citizen has a stake in healthcare policy decisions. Hence, it is little wonder why healthcare items become such high-profile components of presidential agendas. It is also little wonder why they become such hotly debated agenda items.

Consider a topic (mental health, HIV, opioid epidemic, pandemics, obesity, prescription drug prices, or many others) that rises to the presidential level. How did the current and previous presidents handle the problem? What would you do differently?

Reference:
New York State Department of Health. (n.d.). Making New York the healthiest state: Achieving the triple aim. Retrieved June 21, 2021 from https://www.health.ny.gov/events/population_health_summit/docs/what_is_population_health.pdf

Resources

 

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

To Prepare:

  • Review the Resources and reflect on the importance of agenda setting.
  • Consider how federal agendas promote healthcare issues and how these healthcare issues become agenda priorities.

By Day 3 of Week 1

Post your response to the discussion question: Consider a population health topic that rises to the presidential agenda level. Which social determinant most affects this health issue? How did two recent presidents handle the problem? What would you do differently?

By Day 6 of Week 1

Respond to at least two of your colleagues* on two different days by expanding on their response and providing an example that supports their explanation or respectfully challenging their explanation and providing an example.

*Note: Throughout this program, your fellow students are referred to as colleagues.

NURS_6050_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric

NURS_6050_Module01_Week01_Discussion_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Posting
50 to >44.0 ptsExcellent

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

44 to >39.0 ptsGood

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. …. Supported by at least three credible sources. … Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

39 to >34.0 ptsFair

Responds to some of the discussion question(s). … One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. … Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. … Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … Post is cited with two credible sources. … Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Contains some APA formatting errors.

34 to >0 ptsPoor

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. … Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. … Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. … Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. … Contains only one or no credible sources. … Not written clearly or concisely. … Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. … Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

50 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Main Post: Timeliness
10 to >0.0 ptsExcellent

Posts main post by day 3.

0 ptsPoor

Does not post by day 3.

10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome First Response
18 to >16.0 ptsExcellent

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. … Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. … Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. … Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

16 to >14.0 ptsGood

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. … Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. … Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 to >12.0 ptsFair

Response is on topic and may have some depth. … Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. … Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. … Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

12 to >0 ptsPoor

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. … Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. … Responses to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited.

18 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Second Response
17 to >15.0 ptsExcellent

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. … Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. … Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. … Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 to >13.0 ptsGood

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. … Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. … Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. … Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. … Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 to >11.0 ptsFair

Response is on topic and may have some depth. … Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. … Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. … Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

11 to >0 ptsPoor

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. … Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. … Responses to faculty questions are missing. … No credible sources are cited.

17 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Participation
5 to >0.0 ptsExcellent

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 ptsPoor

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

5 pts
Total Points: 100

Open chat
Dr.Nursingpapers
Hello
Can we help you?