In or persuade the individual to do things

In care, we should develop an acknowledgment that sometimes
ethics in health care overlap. In ethics, you base the care for patients and
clients based on sound judgement or evidence based practice. This judgement is
about having a strong sense of knowing what is right and what is wrong. You
will also need to consider what is acceptable and what is not acceptable as
health care workers. When being a health care worker you will develop a better
understanding of what your prime concern ought to be, especially when dealing
with other people. You will sometimes have to make difficult decisions for the
current issue you are dealing sometimes there is not always a straightforward
answer to the issue.

An ethical issue is when you are put in a difficult situation
between making a hard choice this will have an impact on your choice of decisions
or actions; you will start to question yourself on whether you should or should
not act upon your choices of decisions or actions. You will also have to make
judgements on whether the option is right thing to do or the wrong thing to do.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Ethical issues in health care usually consist of the
definition of life, what is a person, quality of life, prolonging life, ending
life, and human rights.  However, there
are a few day-to-day ethical issues such as, respecting people, treating people
with dignity, treating people fairly, and supporting patient’s choices. These
principles belong to the NMC code, the code is a useful source of ethical
principles in health care. Some key values to ethic are autonomy, well-being, needs,
respect, consent, anti-discrimination.

Autonomy is allowing the individuals their rights to make
their own decisions based on what they feel is best for them and supporting
them to make the best decisions to suit them. You should never try to force or
persuade the individual to do things they do not want to. The most important
outcome of this principle is to have informed consent from the individual so
they are fully aware of the possible outcomes or consequences.

Beneficence main aim is to provide beneficial support to help
others; this includes their health, welfare, comfort, well-being, improve a
person’s potential, and most importantly to improve their quality of life. The
benefit outcome is what the individual says will benefit them, not what others
suggest. You would have to act on behalf of a vulnerable person in order to
protect their rights, stop them from preventing harm, to help people in crises,
and to create a safe and supportive environment. Non-maleficence makes sure
that there is no harm caused to any individuals. You will also have to make
sure that you do not deprive people from having or using anything they want or
require. It also makes sure that you do not kill, that you do not cause any
offence, not to cause any unnecessary pain or suffering, and most importantly
not inflict harm towards other people. Both beneficence and non-maleficence
underpin evidence-based practice.

Justice will occur when you treat people fairly, and by not
favouring any individuals or groups. You will need to be able to respect the
law, have respect for people’s rights, and be able to act in a
non-discriminatory and non-prejudicial way. Many people will often question the
way justice is distributed; they will often wonder how they share out
healthcare resources, and how they manage to share time with patients and
clients. Another thing you have to consider is whether the clients all deserve
the same entitlements to an equal share, are should they just have enough
support to meet their needs, or should they deserve what they can afford to pay
for.

When it comes to ethical rules, there are four main rules you
need to consider; they are veracity, privacy, confidentiality, and fidelity. Veracity
is telling the truth, allowing the client to give informed consent, and respect
for autonomy. Privacy; is when a person stays private about their rights, and
not to allow anyone to reveal or expose information. Confidentiality is when
information is secret or stays private, but will be shares on a need to know
basis to clients. Fidelity; is a loyalty that all clients should have a duty of
care, no matter who they are or what they might have done in the past.

The conversations I had in my group when identifying the ethical issues of
our campaign was the concerns related to infringing on people’s privacy,
interfering with their rights to freedom of choice, autonomy and the issues of
equality. We noticed there was an age gap of audience in Merthyr College from
16 years+, therefore we had to make sure the information was appropriate for
all ages. Throughout our
health campaign, we promoted autonomy by not forcing our information onto
anyone; instead, we waited for someone to approach us. Therefore, it was up to
the individuals if they wanted to learn more about our campaign or if they
wanted to walk right past our stand without paying any attention. By not
harassing anyone to come to our stand, we respected him or her rights by not
trying to give any handouts about drink driving. If the target audience did
come to our stand their information had to maintain confidentiality, by doing
this, we are respecting them by not passing on their personal information to
everyone else. We could only offer support cards, leaflets, posters to the
individual because we was not professional in the sector we was campaigning for
we couldn’t really help them personal, instead we had to tell there where to go
for help.

We made a few changes to our campaign according to our ethical
considerations, we respected people who didn’t want to be bothered, and those
who just wanted to look at the stall without picking up any leaflets or contact
cards. We also didn’t infringe on people’s privacy, by this we mean that we
didn’t ask them to tell us their life story or we didn’t need to know any
information about them, but we was there to promote the health concern and we
was able to answer questions and direct them to the right help if they needed
further support. Before we made our changes we would go up to people and
approach them to come to our stall, especially if they was sitting down; but
then we learned that we was in the wrong for invading their space. So we
learned that we should go forcing our information on to people, if they want to
come and have a look what we’re promoting they will approach as at a time convenient
to the individual.

If we did not change our campaign to incorporate ethics there was a risk
that we might be infringing on people’s privacy, and not respecting their
decisions on not knowing what our campaign is promoting. We also could have
damaged the look of the campaign if we didn’t consider the type of information
and imagery used, because we considered these two factors we shouldn’t have
offended anyone, as they only showed actual visuals of what could happen if you
drink and drive and true facts and statics to shock the viewers. We wasn’t
allowed to use any offensive imagery, or slogans; we also had to make sure our
images wasn’t too gruesome for the audience to see. 

The model used for this campaign was the Prochaska and Di
Clement’s model of behaviour change.

Thinking about change-
Knows the risks of driving whilst under the influence of alcohol, and thinking
about making a change to be a safer driver.

Planning for change-
Therefore, they plan to make a change, to reduce the risk of them being
involved in a fatal car accident that could end up hurting others around them.

Making a change-The
individual will need to modify their behaviour and experiences in order to
overcome their drinking problems. They will need to stay committed to wanting
to make the change.

Maintaining a change-
Seeking help from a professional in the sector, so they will be able to control
their drink limits or even stop drinking completely.

Relapsing- If
they end up relapsing they will have to redo the cycle, with a positive I can
do attitude to overcome the problem.

We also
decided that Prochaska and Di Clemente’s stages of change model would be
suitable because this model helps to break down the process of behaviour to
help maintain a stable behaviour. The model has a five stage approach;
pre-contemplation, contemplation, preparation, action and maintenance.
Pre-contemplation is when an individual is unaware of their problems, therefore
they have no intention to change their behaviours. Contemplation is a stage
where the individual has realised they need to change their behaviour, but they
still have not changed their attitude towards their behaviour. Preparation
means they have set a date to when they are going to try to change their behaviour.
Action involves commitment from the individual with their time and energy; this
means they will have to adapt their situation such as their environment to
change their behaviour. Maintenance means that people will have to work hard
not to prevent relapse during the action stage. Many people has to redo this
process multiple times before they can successfully leave the cycle, and guaranteed
a stable behaviour change. Each attempt helps to achieve the long-term
behaviour change. If they fail the cycle, they should consider it as part of
the learning cycle. This approach is not exactly suitable the purpose of
drinking driving because they are putting themselves and others at risk every
time they get in their car with a consumption of alcohol. The process has to
take place immediately to stop relapsing, but little steps are a good way to
achieving the long-term affect, also by dealing with these stages, they will be
able to understand how they are affecting those around them after they are
aware of their issue.

We chose not
to use the Rosenstock- the health belief model because it is more helpful for
those smoking, and those who need to diet; it does not really work for those
with drink driving issues. Below I have explained the model in detail, and
provided an example for how the model will help someone who wants to use this
health belief model to give up smoking.

Perceived
threat has three outcomes, personal susceptibility, seriousness of threat, and
cue to action. Personal susceptibility this is how vulnerable you are feeling. Seriousness
of threat is set on beliefs concerning the outcomes of the behaviour; it
concentrates on the negative outcomes. Lastly, cue to action is due to internal
and external factors, which make you concerned about your health behaviour.

The
likelihood of behaviour change is when the individual has a combination of both
thought process, the perceived threat and the cost-benefit analysis. The
behaviour change will not happen if the perceived threat outweighs the
cost-benefit analysis. The cost-benefit analysis takes into account the balance
between the benefit of outcome and the cost of action. The benefit of outcomes
are the predicted advantage of the behaviour change. Whereas the cost of action
is usually the disadvantage and the barrier stopping the behaviour change.

Wanting to
change your health behaviour sometimes is not enough to make someone actually
make changes. There are two elements involved in affecting change these are
cues to action and self-efficacy. Cue to action is things that exist in our surrounding
that make us want to change our behaviour; for an example if a close friend is
dying of lung cancer you are more than likely willing to give up smoking not to
develop lung cancer. This is known an perceived susceptibility because you want
change your behaviour until you know it’s true that smoking will cause lung
cancer, not just someone saying it to scare you.  Another cue to action is poster in public
loos telling you to wash your hands; a tv campaign to eat low-cholesterol
spread and if a friend needs to be treated for a STI. All these will make you
more aware on different matters, sometimes they might relate to you and
sometimes they will not; either way they will be providing you with knowledge.
Self-efficacy comes from you having faith in your ability to make the change in
behaviour to get to the results you want, if you have a negative mind that you
will fail, you will!

Most people
use this health belief model when adapting changes to their healthy living,
here is an example of someone using the health belief model to make changes to
their health. His doctor has informed Jeff that he is in the overweight
category for his bmi, Jeff is now aware and concerned about his healthy life
style. Perceived susceptibility, Jeff knows if he keeps up with his bad eating
habits, he will become obese. Perceived severity he believes that the
consequences of becoming obsess will lead to other health problems. Perceived
benefits would be that from having a proper healthy diet and fitness will
prevent him from becoming obese. Perceived barriers, he is too embarrassed to
go to the gym due to his lack of knowledge on fitness therefore he needs a
personal trainer to show and to help him. His cue for action would be to remind
himself to exercise every day. Self-efficacy is that he will eventually build
confidence from eating healthy and exercising this will make it easier for him
to keep up the positive behaviour change.

We decided to approach the target audience face-to-face in
the college atrium, to help promote safer driving. We thought this approach
would be more successful, because people can come to our stall to participate
in our questionnaire, they will also be able to talk to as about our campaign,
read our posters and leaflets provided, and to get a better understanding of
the risk of their unsafe behaviour whilst being on the road. We also provided
drunk goggles, for people to get a better understanding of how their eyesight
gets affected after some alcohol consumptions and how their judgements in
distances and directions will be further off from when they expect they are.

The aim of this campaign was to promote safer driving in
general.  The aim and objective helped bring
the project forward and the overall finished campaign. I think we met the aim
because we produced a number of different posters, leaflets to promote safer
driving, to reduce the risks of a fatal car accidents, but mainly focusing on
drink driving because we found this was a major issue on the roads as well as
competitive driving. This aim helped us to meet target because people could
read and see more information on the topic, rather than looking on the internet
themselves. By producing the information it also made it accessible to everyone
in the college atrium, we had interacting goggles so people could get a better
understanding of how badly alcohol does affect your vision. We also had a
brief, showing how your lungs, liver etc could be affect by your intake of
alcohol after a period. We could have had another objective, to increase the audience
of our campaign because even though the atrium is big, it counts more if people
see your campaign whereas we did not have that much of an audience to educate
people about our health issues.

I think our overall campaign looked organised and well presented,
but if we was to redo it, we would like to have had more information to make
our stand look fuller as we had space for more posters and leaflets. The
factors that influenced the effectiveness of this campaign  was the interactive side where people could
fill out a questionnaire and try on the goggles, this helped to improve their
understanding on what it feels like to try and concentrate whilst having a high
consumption of alcohol.

I do not think there was anything poor about our campaign,
but we could improve on little things to improve the overall campaign. Maybe
next time we could use a location where more people would see us rather than
behind pillars; and possibly away from doors, so more people would look at our
campaigns rather than rushing in and rushing out. Another way to help promote
this campaign was if we advertised well in advance that we would be promoting
our issues downstairs in the atrium at that specific set date,  then we possibly would have had more viewers
coming to look at our stores. We also could have done a running week of doing
the campaign so that way we would be educating more people on our chosen
campaign, to help promote the issue. The campaign in the Atrium did only last
an hour, maybe if we was there for at least a day we would have had a more
positive impact on our target audience. If we had another opportunity to do
this campaign, I would make sure that the questionnaires was back to back,
instead of having two papers. This would improve the data and information on being
together, rather than mixed up or lost.

If money were no object, I would go about marketing our
campaign differently to reach more people. I would be able to promote my
campaign using social media platforms, this way we would be able to have a
global audience, and this would save on printing costs. By sharing, it on
social media it makes it easier for the message to me passed on to other people
if someone shares the posts. If money is no object it helps the way we would go about evaluating our
campaign to find out what our target audience thought when they saw it. We
would also be able to get more feedback from online if people found the
campaign useful or not by them commenting and reacting to the post. It is also
instant feedback therefore; we do not need to tally up any information for
questionnaires.