Assessment 2
Analyse the following hypothetical case in relation to the five learning outcomes. The case relates to a psychologist and the law is relevant across health and disability occupations.
Fictional case
A registered psychologist provided couple’s therapy to clients A (a woman) and B (a man). The clients were counselled separately and together for their relationship issues.
The psychologist developed an individual, social and personal relationship with B. The final straw was when A discovered the psychologist had gone to dinner with B. A filed a complaint with the Health and Disability Commissioner.
The psychologist expressed her resentment of the complaint by sending the following e-mail to A: “You are crazy. You are ruining my career. The complaint is exactly why your husband doesn’t want to be with you. There is no hope for your marriage.”
WRITING INSTRUCTION
No introduction or conclusion is required. Use the heading LO1, LO2, LO3, and LO4 to address the following learning outcomes as detailed in the grid. LO5 relates to the academic standard.
Analyse the legal implications for the registered psychologist through the learning outcomes.
1. Demonstrate understanding of legal institutions and processes in health care (500 words). Netsafe, Health and Disability Commissioner, Human Rights Review Tribunal and Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal may be relevant.
2. Analyse the role of civil and criminal law on health care policy and practice (500 words). Demonstrate knowledge of the distinction between civil and criminal law (burden of proof and standard of proof). Examine whether there are potential criminal law implications pursuant to the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015.
3. Critique cases or legislation related to consumers’ rights based on scholarly research (500 words). Discuss how the law (not the psychologist’s conduct) could be improved for consumers, citing research.
4. Examine the implications of case law and legislation for your current or future health care practice (500 words). Focus on implications of the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015 for your occupation in detail.
State what your occupation is (oral hygienist). State whether that is a registered or unregistered occupation. Explain the specific legal lessons learned by applying the case to your future practice. If you are becoming a registered practitioner, the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal may be relevant.
Marking Criteria:
|
Learning Outcome |
A Range |
B Range |
C Range |
D |
||||||
|
|
9 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
|
LO1 |
In depth understanding of relevant legal institutions and processes in health care is demonstrated. |
Understanding of relevant legal institutions and processes in health care is clearly demonstrated. |
Some understanding of relevant legal institutions and processes in health care is demonstrated. |
Insufficient understanding of relevant legal institutions and processes in health care is demonstrated. |
||||||
|
LO2 |
The role of civil and criminal law on health care policy and practice is analysed thoroughly and in depth. |
The role of civil and criminal law on health care policy and practice is analysed clearly and accurately.
|
The role of civil and criminal law on health care policy and practice is briefly analysed with some inaccuracies. |
The role of civil and criminal law on health care and practice is insufficiently analysed with some inaccuracies. |
||||||
|
LO3 |
Cases or legislation related to consumers’ rights based on scholarly research are critiqued robustly and in depth. |
Cases or legislation related to consumers’ rights based on scholarly research are soundly critiqued. |
Cases or legislation related to consumers’ rights are briefly critiqued or critique has minimal reference to scholarly research. |
Cases or legislation relating to consumers’ rights are insufficiently critiqued based on scholarly research. |
||||||
|
LO4 |
The implications of case law and legislation for current or future health care practice are examined robustly and in depth. |
The implications of case law and legislation for current or future health care practice are soundly examined. |
The implications of case law and legislation for current or future health care practice are briefly examined. |
The implications of case law and legislation for current or future health care practice are insufficiently examined. |
||||||
|
LO5 |
Excellent structure and coherence. Sources are consistently credible, relevant and of recognised academic quality. Consistently accurate use of language, grammar and spelling. Appropriate referencing. Minimal editing required. |
Good structure and coherence. Sources are mostly credible, relevant and of recognised academic quality. Mostly accurate use of language, grammar and spelling. Appropriate referencing. Some editing required. |
Structure and coherence could be improved to aid analysis. Some sources are credible, relevant and/or of recognised academic quality. Multiple issues of inaccurate use of language, grammar, and/or inappropriate referencing. Substantial editing required. |
Insufficient structure and coherence. Few sources cited or are credible, relevant and/or of recognised academic quality. Substantial issues of inaccurate use of language, grammar and spelling. Poor referencing. Very substantial editing required. |
||||||
