A Right To Experimental Drugs

December 22, 2022

A Right To Experimental Drugs

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

A Right To Experimental Drugs

[Order Now]

Description

A RIGHT TO EXPERIMENTAL DRUGS?

This week, you learned about the rigorous process of clinical trials that test new drugs before being approved for treatment. The process, which involves three distinct phases of testing, takes a great deal of time, with some trials lasting many years. Before approval, patients not part of a clinical trial have limited or no access to experimental drugs, even though these drugs could be helpful and potentially save their lives.

Early stages of research on a drug sometimes suggest that the drug could be effective in treating a certain disease. But without going through the full clinical trial process, doctors do not know if the drug is effective at all. The vast majority of experimental drugs turn out to be completely ineffective, and the drug might have very dangerous side effects.

Therefore, do patients with no other treatment options, particularly those who are not able to participate in a clinical drug trial, have a moral right to unproven drugs? In other words, do these patients have a moral right to the same drugs available to patients who are participating in a clinical trial? Create an argument that explains and defends your view on this issue. In addition to reviewing your textbook, you are encouraged to locate additional resources in the Capella library, your public library, or authoritative online sites to provide additional support for your viewpoint. Be sure to weave and cite the resources throughout your work.

Address the following points:

Identify moral theories (from Week 1) and ethical principles (from Week 2) that help shed light on the ethical problems raised by expanded access and that best support your own position.

Moral Theories:

Week 1 Utilitarianism. Kantian moral theory (deontology). Ross’s ethics. Natural law theory. Ethical Principles:

Week 2 Non-malfeasance. Beneficence. Utility. Principles of distributive justice.

Autonomy.

Explain how the principle of informed consent is relevant to the issue.

Explain the costs and benefits of making unproven, unapproved experimental drugs available to patients not participating in clinical drug trials.

Consider the costs and benefits not only to the individual patients who take these drugs but also potential costs and benefits to other patients.

Articulate arguments using examples for and against offering pre-approved drugs to wider pools of patients.

Support your view using ethical theories or moral principles (or both) that you find most relevant to the issue. Exhibit proficiency in clear and effective academic writing skills.

Assignment Requirements Your paper should meet the following requirements:

Written communication:

Written communication is free of errors that detract from the overall message. APA formatting:

Resources and citations are formatted according to current APA style and formatting guidelines.

Length: 3–5 typed, double-spaced pages. Font and font size: Times New Roman, 12 point

Competency 1:

Articulate ethical issues in health care.

Explain how the principle of informed consent is relevant to the issues.

Explain the costs and benefits of offering unapproved experimental drugs to patients.

Competency 2:

Apply sound ethical thinking related to a health care issue. Identify relevant ethical theories and moral principles. Articulate arguments using examples for and against offering experimental drugs to wider pools of patients.

Competency 5:

Apply in text the standard writing conventions for the discipline, including structure, voice, person, tone, and citation formatting. Exhibit proficiency in clear and effective academic writing skills.

[Order Now]

A Right To Experimental Drugs

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.