Assignment:
Draft and timely submit an internal organization decisional memorandum to assist the organization in deciding whether to adopt the proposed Wellness Policy in its current or modified form.
Assignment instructions:
Structure your memorandum using this decision memorandum format attached. Ensure you comply with all Decisional Memorandum Format directions and requirements.
Scenario:
Decisional Memorandum
Date:
From: [You – your name here]
To: Board of Directors
Subject: Proposed Wellness Policy
1. Executive Summary. [Provide a concise, one-line summary statement of issue, In
this case use the following “Does the organization have the legal right and ethical
authority to implement the proposed Policy in its current or modified form?”];
2. BLUF – Bottom Line Up Front. [Provide a concise answer to the Executive
Summary – For example “Yes, the proposed Policy is both legal and ethical,” or “No, the
proposed policy neither legal nor ethical as proposed,” etc. Do not expand or provide
justification for your position – this will covered in your section 4 analysis sections
below. Note: this should be your last step because it is a one-line summary of your
conclusion(s) and recommendation(s) which can only be properly determined and
completed only after your conduct your section 4 ethical and legal analyses].
3. Facts: [Provide a succinct summary of relevant facts from the assignment scenario.
Ask yourself, if I were new to this issue and had not read the proposed policy what basic
facts would I want/need to know? In other words, in no more than a paragraph briefly
summarize the Committee’s actions and its proposed policy.]
4. Analysis
[Your analysis section, comprised of separate analyses addressing potential ethical and
legal concerns, must answer and thoroughly explain the question whether the employer
can or should (sometimes two different things!) legally and ethically implement the
proposed plan and, most importantly, why or why not? Reminder – this must be an
objective assessment based on recognized ethical values, assessment processes, and
decision-making models and not a mere reflection of your personal, subjective opinion,
likes, or dislikes concerning the terms and conditions of the proposed policy from an
employee perspective.]
Part A. Ethical Issue(s) Identification and Analysis
[In this section you will address, identify, objectively assess the ethical issues raised by
this proposed policy to determine whether the company’s implementation of the
proposed Wellness Policy would be ethical defendable.
Using your first written assignment as a template, start by listing the course’s eight
steps of the ethical decision-making process, identify and discuss at least three
applicable course Universal Values, and identify and apply at least one course ethical
decision-making model relevant to this scenario. In doing so, ensure you describe the
model, explain why this model is useful to the scenario’s ethical dilemma, fully list the
model’s framework steps, and conduct your critical thinking analysis by thoroughly
assessing each individual step. These individual framework step assessment are the
most important part of your ethical decision-making model analyses so take your time
and make them the focus of your effort.
For your ethical issue(s) analysis, to keep you focused and organized and to make your
analytical process clear to your intended reader, structure it this way:
“The issue is whether the proposed Wellness policy is ethical. The accepted 8-step
ethical decision-making process is. . ” [list and then address each step using the
scenario facts] [NOTE: You already have this from your first assignment so just cut-andpaste it here].
“Three Universal Ethical Values applicable and relevant to this situation are [list each
value].
The first ethical value for consideration is [state value]. This value requires . . . Applied
to this situation, the proposed unauthorized disclosure of patient information, application
of the value results in [state your assessment and analysis of the value vis-à-vis the
scenario facts.
Repeat for the remaining two Universal Values.
[New paragraph] “An applicable decision-making model for this situation is. . . [ethical
decision-making model] because. . .” [describe how this model is helpful for this
situation]. “Its “X”-step framework is. . .”[completely list its steps] [NOTE: You already
have this from your first assignment so just cut-and-paste it here].
[New paragraph] “For Step 1 we must consider/determine/address. . .” [Then fully
address this step and its requirements, issues, etc. using scenario facts, outside source,
etc. to conduct your analysis.]
NOTE: These individual framework step assessment are the most important part of your
ethical decision-making model analyses so take your time and make them the focus of
your effort. In other words, your focus of effort in your ethical analyses should be your
framework steps-to-fact assessments. Take your time and provide a thorough and
balanced assessment of each framework step. As a guide, each of these framework
step analyses should be a separate 3-5 sentence paragraph.
Repeat this process for each of the remaining steps.
Finally, does the ethical decision-making model’s results align with your Universal
Values results? [It should].
For an example of how to do all this, read and comply with my course Written
Assignment Guidance, specifically the Practice Tip: Ethical Model Analysis located in
the Getting Started Module.
Be thorough and specific in your analyses. Do not work backwards by chosen an ethical
decision-making model that supports your subjective opinion concerning the proposed
policy. You are conducting an objective assessment so ensure you address both the
employee and employer perspectives working fully, objectively, and fairly to justify,
support your ethical issue(s) analysis result to answer the question. This may mean the
models may provide conflicting results – that, unfortunately, is life. You, as the educated
assessor have to weigh, balance, and decide on a recommended best course for the
hospital and the patient.
Part B. Legal Issue(s) Identification and Analysis
[In this section, identify, define, and objectively assess any laws, regulations, case law,
ordinances, etc. identified in the textbook that directs, permits, limits, or prohibits the
proposed policy’s implementation. In other words, in this section you must objectively
assess the legality of the proposed action – is it legal? As with your ethical issue(s)
analysis above, be thorough and specific. Specifically identify your legal source(s), cite
the exact provision(s) used to support your position, and address whether an exceptions
applies and if so, why or why not? This section provides your objective assessment and
support for your determination whether implementation of the proposed policy is legally
permitted.
5. Conclusion(s)
[This should be 1 to 3 concise and specific issue conclusory bullets or short sentences.
These conclusions must be based on your above ethical and legal analyses. Do not
introduce any facts or issues not previously addressed above. Your conclusions must
answer your Executive Summary and justify your BLUF.]
Example: “For the above stated reasons, Patient A’s information should be released to .
. . because . . . (summarize rationale)
6. Recommendation(s)
[In this section you are providing specific “actionable” recommendations to the hospital.
Release, not release, or partially release Patient A’s information to . . .
Note: Your recommendation(s) must be supported by and based on your conclusion(s)
which, in turn, must be supported by and based on your analyses that are a result of
you applying the rules (ethics and law) to the scenario facts provided.]
7. References
[Properly cite all of your supporting ethical and legal references in this section].
[Note 1: It is not enough to merely identify the issues and then task your
superiors with conducting the hard analyses – that is your job to do the hard
work, assess the risks, reach the correct and supported conclusions, and make
the appropriate recommendations.]
[Note 2: Ensure you conduct a thorough pre-submission review, edit, and spelling
check]
1
Ethical Decision-Making Models and Frameworks
Name
Course
School
Professor name
Due date
2
1. The 8-Step Process for Ethical Decision-Making
The ability to make ethical decisions is fundamental in a range of professions, including
medicine. The information in the text includes an 8-step model that can be taken as a
predetermined plan for those involved with decision making.
Recognize the Ethical Issues: The first stage is where potential ethical hazards are
spotted. It also involves judging what is on the line and morality behind it.
Gather All the Relevant Facts: When these ethical issues are identified, all relevant
information should be acquired (Wagner 2020). This phase focuses on the need to understand
every element around context and outcomes.
Survey Decision-Making Models: The third step is the assessment of some decisionmaking models. This also includes understanding of other alternatives and models that can assist
in solving ethical dilemmas.
Evaluate the Relevance of Each Model for the Situation: This is done by describing the
particulars of a certain dilemma and ensuring that your model complies with parameters
underlying ethical questions.
Apply the Appropriate Model to the Situation: The fifth step involves implementing a
chosen framework along with an ethical dilemma. This is a reasonable and logical step.
Make Decisions Based on the Model: The model determines the decision-making. It is
necessary to highlight that this stage pays much attention to the model principles focus.
3
Monitor the Results of Those Decisions: The seventh step is controlling the outcome of
decisions. This means assessing whether the selected course of action aligns with desired ethical
outcomes and determining unintended consequences.
Monitor Progress and Repeat the Process as Changes Occur: The last part of the ethical
decision-making process is implemented by monitoring progress and reviewing again whenever
there are changes. This iterative process stays with the ability to respond quickly in defining new
ethical challenges.
2. 10 Universal Values in Ethical Decision-Making
The ten universal values govern healthcare ethics, and each of these is significantly
responsible for influencing the patterns of behavior adopted by health practitioners.
Autonomy: The basic principle of autonomy is respecting people’s health decisions. For
instance, a patient has the right to refuse treatment if it is beneficial.
Beneficence: Beneficence is directed at the need to benefit patients’ well-being. For
example, a healthcare provider could recommend an intervention that maximizes benefits and
minimizes the risk of harm.
Compassion: The true meaning of sympathy and empathy arises from compassion. It
includes patient-centered care, which is the comfort of a distressed person.
Equality of Opportunity: The value that equality of opportunity represents is equality in
healthcare access (van Bruchem-Visser et al., 2020). This can be done by fairly allocating the
available resources to all patients regardless of their socio-economic class.
4
Fairness: Healthcare decision-making fairness is founded on impersonality and
equality. For instance, practitioners can choose patients based on medical indicators instead of
favoritism.
Human Dignity: Human dignity is a concept that considers every individual worthy of
respect and treated morally. The right to privacy and confidentiality of a patient is one practical
application of the idea that it is human dignity.
Individual Responsibility: This value highlights the responsibility of medical
professionals for their behavior and decisions. According to this ethical perspective, an
individual should not deny their faults.
Justice: The concept of health fairness is a general idea referring to the fair distribution of
benefits and costs. For instance, rationing arises due to shortages in medical resources for all
groups and categories.
Non-Malfeasance: Malfeasance calls for the absence of harmful activities by the
providers. This stems from the reluctance to do anything that might unintentionally harm
patients.
Truthfulness: The principle of truthfulness emphasizes honesty and transparency in the
health-communicative process. This also means that patients are given the right information
about their cases and treatment.
3. The Rights Model of Ethical Decision-Making
The Rights Model involves a wide scope that brings together morals and legality linked
to human rights. Individual moral privileges go beyond the limits of the law, such as life,
5
freedom, and personal safety. On the contrary, legal rights specified in laws of a given
jurisdiction may concur with moral ones but at the same time exceed them; such an intricate
relationship between private freedoms and restrictions established by the state shall arise.
The 5-step framework of the Rights Model unrolls as a structured route, helping decisionmakers navigate their way through conflicting rights:
1. Identifying the Rights Involved: The first step is a comprehensive analysis to identify
the rights involved in the ethical dilemma (Lim et al., 2023). This necessitates a wide
understanding of the rights of individuals and society.
2. Determining the Priority of Conflicting Rights: The model is a subtle consideration in
balancing conflicting rights and, hence, determination between overrides. According to the above
prioritization, a line of events dictates what will come after it.
3. Evaluating the Moral and Legal Weight of Each Right: This step involves a close
examination of moral and legal issues related to each right identified. Through such
measurements of the cost and effect that every right will have, decision-makers get impressions
regarding what kind of ethical terrain they manage.
4. Seeking Alternatives that Respect Rights: When rights come in conflict with each
other, this model gives an idea to find potential alternatives that would not threaten preciously
identified rights. The generative stage characterizes the creative approach to obtaining ethical
solutions.
5. Making a Decision Based on the Evaluation of Rights: The final step is when a clearly
defined action occurs after the assessment of rights has been made precisely (Sambala et al.,
6
2020). This ethical move results in the assurance of harmony between prioritized, respectful, and
balanced rights course/action.
Overall, the legitimacy of this validity for the Rights Model is indicated by its strong
morality despite conflicting laws. As such, this model allows for the inclusion of moral and legal
components in a rather complex way that could serve as an excellent point from which to
construct ethical models. Breaking analyses into a systemic manner leads to an ethical
formulation that clearly restricts self within the boundaries of law but reflects man’s fundamental
rights. Therefore, the Rights Model operates as a great template in this moral terrain where
ethical decisions are tolerant and fair.
4. Philosophy of Utilitarianism and the Utility Model
Utilitarianism is concerned with the Utility Model, a consequentialist theory of choice
that aims to preserve and promote wellness.
The 6-step process of the Utility Model is a systematic guide for decision-makers
navigating ethical quandaries:
1. Identifying All Possible Actions and Their Consequences: To begin with, the model
analyzes every possible alternative and its result. This global analysis can be the foundation for a
reasonable choice.
2. Estimating Overall Happiness or Pleasure: The activities are assessed based on the
level of satisfaction and pleasure that these would produce. This step is a semi-quantitative
metric that shows the value of each action.
7
3. Considering Pain or Suffering: Even more important is the actual recognition of pain
or suffering that would certainly be generated in each step. This step ensures a bias-free
evaluation of both positive and negative cases.
4. Calculating Net Happiness or Pleasure: The quantitative model computes the net
happiness or pleasure for every activity (Mökander et al., 2021). This is the process of
subtracting pain and suffering from happiness or pleasure.
5. Choosing the Action with the Highest Net Happiness: This step is a vital choice point
where the greatest net happiness action must be selected. The model encourages the decisionmakers to choose options that maximize net well-being.
6. Implementing the Chosen Action: The final stage is the implementation of the
decision. With the implementation of the chosen action, the identified decision-makers attempt to
achieve everyone’s maximum and other relevant stakeholders.
The legitimacy of the Utility Model lies in its perpetual attempts at improving total
Utility. By taking a consequentialist approach and quantifying the effects of possible actions, this
model offers an organized way to make moral considerations. It is consistent with utilitarianism
because it focuses on actions that produce the most happiness for the largest number of people.
By and large, the Utility Model is an effective ethical compass that can lead decision-makers
toward the right choices, which not only benefits all but also promotes utilitarianism.
5. The Exceptions Model of Ethical Decision-Making
The Exceptions Model is a unique ethical decision-making framework that recognizes the
fact that, in some situations, it may be justifiable to take actions that are generally considered
8
unethical. As a supplementary method, this model can be introduced once other decision-making
models have been brought into play.
Central to the Exceptions Model is a key question that guides its application: if there are
exceptional circumstances that require a deviation from the typical case ethics. This basic
question as the anchor helps in navigating some of the ethical dilemmas posed by a specific case.
The 5-step process of the Exceptions Model delineates a systematic approach to decisionmaking:
1. Identifying the Ethical Norm or Rule: At first, an analysis of a fine-grained nature may
prove helpful in determining which substantive ethical norm or rule governs this case. This
general data provides the basis for more sophisticated analysis.
2. Evaluating Whether the Situation Qualifies as an Exception: Situation analysis is the
understanding that a deviation from a general ethical premise should be viewed as different
(Tamvada, 2020). This section is dedicated to details of settings that may require some form of
deviation.
3. Weighing the Significance of the Exception: If an exception is identified, its veracity
needs to be evaluated next. This shows it as a rather complex metaphorization of the crisis and
wake left by variance in such an environment.
4. Seeking Alternatives that Uphold Ethical Principles: The stage focuses on imagination
and perception as the main factors influencing decision-making patterns.
9
5. Making a Decision Based on the Evaluation of Exceptions: The final stage is the
decision after analysis of abnormalities. This choice arises from an ethical rule, one of the
potential exceptions and ethical principles that are used for such verdicts.
This model is distinct in that it accommodates exceptions, which are outside of the
ordinary values on limits. Nevertheless, it is apparent that these rules have a peculiar subjective
definition, allowing different options for interpretation.
The empirical side of the exceptions model stems from an assumption that not all ethical
issues can be readily fitted into its paradigm. In fact, this model could be seen as one of the
critical ethical capitals because it is an act dealing with problematic situations for areas requiring
additional justification. To do so, an Exceptions Model is built and enables one to achieve ethical
discussion by managing complications in some instances because of its formal but also flexible
form being a beneficial frame for problem solvers.
6. The Choices Model of Ethical Decision-Making
In comparing between ‘negative’ and “positive,” the Choices Model is concentrated on
dilemmas cases where something must be chosen under the circumstances, determining the
significance of options.
Negative Moral Rights: The freedoms are meant to provide security, either from harm or
inappropriate intrusion. For example, there is a prominent case in the health domain relating to a
patient’s right not to be treated. It aligns with one of the negative moral rights that ensures
autonomy and security for patients.
Positive Moral Rights: Conversely, positive moral rights constitute the right of
individuals to basic commodities or services. For instance, in the field of health access. As
10
viewed from this perspective, the model recognizes that it not only protects individuals but also
is related to satisfying their positive health needs (Sahu et al., 2020). The Choices Model, on
contrary to Euthanasia, is an approach whereby such debates are resolved due to morality as
opposed to liability. The present ethic model depicts forces of morals instead of juridical limits.
The 4-step process of the Choices Model unfolds as a structured guide for ethical
decision-making:
1. Identifying Relevant Moral and Legal Rights: To start with, the model starts by listing
ethical and legal principles relevant to an ethical dilemma. In this phase, one will confirm
whether he or she understood the rights included properly.
2. Resolving Conflicts in Favor of Moral Rights: As per the Choices Model, these
conflicts should occur in any form but must be regarded on an ethical basis. Such a hierarchy
allows an individual to pay moral attention, but such moves are met with legal obstacles.
3. Determining the Expectations in the Situation: In this model, expectations represent the
very essence. The knowledge of the outcomes to be achieved and their moral premises provides a
basis for guidance in making decisions.
4. Making a Decision Based on the Identified Expectations: The final step is to shift the
understanding of expectations into a definite decision. The decision is made as per the needs
identified, thus ensuring consistency and ethical course.
The Choices Model has its validity in the fact that it focuses on both negative and
positive moral rights to reflect a compromise between ethnocentric judgments. Thus, by
recognizing the need to be protected from harm and provided with essential resources, this model
is compatible with the complicated ethics of healthcare (Dhir et al., 2021). It offers an effective
11
structure to the decision-makers who consider intricate legal and ethical factors, guiding
decisions with a holistic understanding of all that healthcare culture implies.
7. The Common Good Model of Ethical Decision-Making
The Common Good Model stresses what is required in the larger interest of society and
differs from Utility by bringing into light communal welfare rather than self-benefit.
This model involves a 6-step process:
1. Identifying the common good involved.
2. Measuring the effect that actions have in promoting or diminishing public good.
3. Considering other options that promote the common good.
4. The action that would serve the better interests of all.
5. Implementing the chosen action.
6. Monitor and re-evaluate its effects on the public interest.
In healthcare, one might say that the difference between the Common Good Model and
the Utility Model is how limited medical resources are allocated to benefit society rather than
increasing individual happiness. The strength of the Common Good Model comes from its
emphasis on community interests and encouraging behavior that brings benefit to society.
8. The Social Media Model of Ethical Decision-Making
The Social Media Model is also called the Publicity Model, and it poses its main question to
think about how a given decision or action will be perceived if disclosed publicly.
The 3-step process of the Social Media Model involves:
12
1. Considering how the decision or action would appear if it occurred in the public domain.
2. Assessing the possible reputational fallout on the organization.
3. Decision-making based on the public opinion criteria.
The Social Media Model validates itself through the need to take public opinion into
consideration in this information-sharing age. By considering the possible implications of public
exposure, this model is a useful method in moral judgment.
9. The Virtue Model of Ethical Decision-Making.
The Virtue Model focuses on the virtues inherent to healthcare professionals, whereby
character qualities that foster ethical behavior are highlighted.
The ten virtues of healthcare professionals include:
1. Empathy
2. Compassion
3. Integrity
4. Honesty
5. Fairness
6. Courage
7. Respect
8. Responsibility
9. Wisdom
13
10. Altruism
Unlike other models of ethical decision-making, the Virtue Model does not follow a
specific sequence. Rather, it promotes virtues that serve as guides to right conduct. The
difference from other models might be illustrated with a healthcare example, when the
professional shows empathy and compassion in challenging patient interactions, representing
virtue cultivation.
The Virtue Model’s validity stems from the focus on character development and cultivation of
virtues, which promotes a more comprehensive approach to ethical decision-making in
healthcare.
10. The Justice Model of Ethical Decision-Making
The Justice Model provides a unique view of ethical decision-making by stating that
Justice means fulfilling the norm while fairness involves equal treatment.
Difference Between Justice and Fairness: As per the model, Justice refers to conformity
with established standards in each scenario. However, Justice is concerned with equal or
proportionate treatment of people – it symbolizes equitable apportionment.
The focus of the Justice Model: According to the Justice Model, activities should fit into
the parameters of a new situation. (Payne et al., 2020). This requires not only recognizing these
expectations but also evaluating alternatives in favor of justice and eventually selecting actions
consistent with the mentioned ones.
The 5-Step Process/Framework:
14
1. Identifying Expectations: The model starts with a most specific formulation of the
assumptions contained in an ethical environment.
2. Assessing Alignment with Expectations: The actions are evaluated based on their
consistency with the given expectations, which provides a base for ethical evaluation.
3. Considering Alternatives for Promoting Justice: Decision makers identify other
alternatives that abide by or promote justice in the given environment.
4. Choosing Action Aligned with Expectations: The act of choice that matches the
presented expectations with an ethically congruent decision is referred to as a decisive action.
5. Implementing the Chosen Action: Convert the selected strategy into a subsequent
action to realize an intention of meeting established expectations within any given situation.
Strengths and Limitations: The key advantage of the Justice Model is that it encourages
fairness, and most people want to make this part of everyday life. However, limits may be
observed when defining and ranking expectations, leading to a cloak of subjectivity in decisionmaking.
Validity of the Justice Model: The Justice Model takes on particular significance in the
healthcare environment, especially when equal treatment is required to be provided. It is a 5-step
framework that guarantees an all-encompassing and systematic approach to bring action into
agreement.
References
15
Dhir, A., Koshta, N., Goyal, R. K., Sakashita, M., & Almotairi, M. (2021). Behavioral reasoning
theory (BRT) perspectives on E-waste recycling and management. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 280, 124269.
Lim, W. M., O’Connor, P., Nair, S., Soleimani, S., & Rasul, T. (2023). A foundational theory of
ethical decision-making: The case of marketing professionals. Journal of Business
Research, 158, 113579.
Mökander, J., Morley, J., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2021). Ethics-based auditing of automated
decision-making systems: Nature, scope, and limitations. Science and Engineering
Ethics, 27(4), 44.
Payne, D. M., Corey, C., Raiborn, C., & Zingoni, M. (2020). An applied code of ethics model for
decision-making in the accounting profession. Management Research Review, 43(9),
1117-1134.
Sahu, A. K., Padhy, R. K., & Dhir, A. (2020). Envisioning the future of behavioral decisionmaking: A systematic literature review of behavioral reasoning theory. Australasian
Marketing Journal, 28(4), 145-159.
Sambala, E. Z., Cooper, S., & Manderson, L. (2020). Ubuntu as a framework for ethical decision
making in Africa: Responding to epidemics. Ethics & Behavior, 30(1), 1-13.
Tamvada, M. (2020). Corporate social responsibility and accountability: a new theoretical
foundation for regulating CSR. International Journal of Corporate Social
Responsibility, 5(1), 1-14.
16
van Bruchem-Visser, R. L., van Dijk, G., de Beaufort, I., & Mattace-Raso, F. (2020). Ethical
frameworks for complex medical decision making in older patients: A narrative
review. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 90, 104160.
Wagner, J. (2020). Ethical Decision-Making Model. Ethics.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
