Assignment Prompt & Instructions
– a year ago
**files (2)**
– ## PhysicianAidCaseStudyAssignment.docx
– ## HLT-305Rubric-PhysicianAid-in-DyingCaseStudy.pdf
**## PhysicianAidCaseStudyAssignment.docx**
Physician Aid-in-Dying is a practice that is legal in a number of states within the United States due to the passing of the Death with Dignity Act.
Please make sure to research this topic prior to beginning this assignment, as you will need to apply this research to your paper.
_Case Study: Physician Aid-in-Dying in Portland, Oregon_
A 35-year-old male named Zachary Davis has lived in and been a legal resident of Portland for almost 20 years. In the fall of 2018 he began having terrible headaches. After months of suffering with these, Zachary made the decision to see his primary care provider. His provider decided that scans should be done to rule out anything serious before beginning treatment for what he thought was probably migraine headaches. Zachary had the routine scans and at 5:00 p.m. he received a call from his doctor with the results. Zachary was diagnosed with advanced stage glioblastoma multiforme brain cancer, one of the deadliest brain tumors with a very low survival rate. Zachary immediately began aggressive treatment. After 12 weeks of treatment, they saw no improvement in his condition. At that time, his doctors sat down with him to discuss options. He was given approximately 6 months to live, giving him the dreaded diagnosis of being terminally ill. They discussed hospice care and other end-of-life options. After surveying the options, Zachary expressed the wish to participate in Physician Aid-In-Dying.
Considering all aspects of the Death With Dignity legislation that has been passed into law in Oregon, consider the following in a paper of
1,000-1,250 words:
1. Does Zachary meet the requirements to take part in this practice? Why? Be detailed and specific in your evaluation of this practice.
2. Considering Death With Dignity legislation, is mental health a component that is evaluated and considered? Do you support this aspect of the legislation?
3. As we near end of life it is often that a surrogate is put in place for our medical decisions. How does this work with the practice of Physician Aid-in-dying?
4. What do you anticipate seeing in the future with this controversial practice in health care?
**PLEASE USE REFERENCES**
**## HLT-305Rubric-PhysicianAid-in-DyingCaseStudy.pdf**
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 1 of 9about:srcdoc
Physician Aid-in-Dying Case Study – Rubric
Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements 18 points
Criteria Description
Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements
5. Excellent 18 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully considers whether the requirements
are met to proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 15.3 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly considers whether the requirements are met to
proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 13.5 points
Essay considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with Physician
Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points
Essay vaguely considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not consider whether the requirements are met to proceed with
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
Collapse All
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 2 of 9about:srcdoc
Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation 17 points
Criteria Description
Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation
5. Excellent 17 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses whether mental health is
a component that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity
legislation.
4. Good 14.45 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses whether mental health is a component
that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
3. Satisfactory 12.75 points
Essay discusses whether mental health is a component that is evaluated and
considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points
Essay vaguely discusses whether mental health is a component that is
evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not discuss whether mental health is a component that is
evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 3 of 9about:srcdoc
Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying 17 points
Criteria Description
Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying
5. Excellent 17 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses how surrogate decision-
making works with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 14.45 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses how surrogate decision-making works
with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 12.75 points
Essay discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the practice of
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points
Essay vaguely discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the
practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not discuss how surrogate decision-making works with the
practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 4 of 9about:srcdoc
The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying 18 points
Criteria Description
The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying
5. Excellent 18 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully anticipates what the future may
hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 15.3 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly anticipates what the future may hold for
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 13.5 points
Essay anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points
Essay vaguely anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not anticipate what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 5 of 9about:srcdoc
Thesis Development and Purpose 7 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent 7 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis
statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good 5.95 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is
descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory 5.25 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 4.55 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 6 of 9about:srcdoc
Argument Logic and Construction 8 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent 8 points
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive
and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good 6.8 points
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are
evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to
conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory 6 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument
presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not
thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction
and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 5.2 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity.
There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable
credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does
not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible
sources.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 7 of 9about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent 5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good 4.25 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The
writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly
distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-
appropriate language are employed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies
in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is
correct but not varied.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 8 of 9about:srcdoc
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and
assignment)
5 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent 5 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good 4.25 points
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting
style.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor
errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A
lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely
followed correctly.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 9 of 9about:srcdoc
Documentation of Sources 5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent 5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to
assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good 4.25 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although
some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**## HLT-305Rubric-PhysicianAid-in-DyingCaseStudy.pdf**
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 1 of 9about:srcdoc
Physician Aid-in-Dying Case Study – Rubric
Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements 18 points
Criteria Description
Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements
5. Excellent 18 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully considers whether the requirements
are met to proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 15.3 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly considers whether the requirements are met to
proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 13.5 points
Essay considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with Physician
Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points
Essay vaguely considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not consider whether the requirements are met to proceed with
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
Collapse All
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 2 of 9about:srcdoc
Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation 17 points
Criteria Description
Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation
5. Excellent 17 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses whether mental health is
a component that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity
legislation.
4. Good 14.45 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses whether mental health is a component
that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
3. Satisfactory 12.75 points
Essay discusses whether mental health is a component that is evaluated and
considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points
Essay vaguely discusses whether mental health is a component that is
evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not discuss whether mental health is a component that is
evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 3 of 9about:srcdoc
Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying 17 points
Criteria Description
Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying
5. Excellent 17 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses how surrogate decision-
making works with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 14.45 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses how surrogate decision-making works
with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 12.75 points
Essay discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the practice of
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points
Essay vaguely discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the
practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not discuss how surrogate decision-making works with the
practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 4 of 9about:srcdoc
The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying 18 points
Criteria Description
The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying
5. Excellent 18 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully anticipates what the future may
hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 15.3 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly anticipates what the future may hold for
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 13.5 points
Essay anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points
Essay vaguely anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not anticipate what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 5 of 9about:srcdoc
Thesis Development and Purpose 7 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent 7 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis
statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good 5.95 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is
descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory 5.25 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 4.55 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 6 of 9about:srcdoc
Argument Logic and Construction 8 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent 8 points
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive
and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good 6.8 points
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are
evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to
conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory 6 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument
presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not
thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction
and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 5.2 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity.
There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable
credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does
not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible
sources.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 7 of 9about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent 5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good 4.25 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The
writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly
distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-
appropriate language are employed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies
in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is
correct but not varied.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 8 of 9about:srcdoc
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and
assignment)
5 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent 5 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good 4.25 points
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting
style.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor
errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A
lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely
followed correctly.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 9 of 9about:srcdoc
Documentation of Sources 5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent 5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to
assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good 4.25 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although
some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**## PhysicianAidCaseStudyAssignment.docx**
Physician Aid-in-Dying is a practice that is legal in a number of states within the United States due to the passing of the Death with Dignity Act.
Please make sure to research this topic prior to beginning this assignment, as you will need to apply this research to your paper.
_Case Study: Physician Aid-in-Dying in Portland, Oregon_
A 35-year-old male named Zachary Davis has lived in and been a legal resident of Portland for almost 20 years. In the fall of 2018 he began having terrible headaches. After months of suffering with these, Zachary made the decision to see his primary care provider. His provider decided that scans should be done to rule out anything serious before beginning treatment for what he thought was probably migraine headaches. Zachary had the routine scans and at 5:00 p.m. he received a call from his doctor with the results. Zachary was diagnosed with advanced stage glioblastoma multiforme brain cancer, one of the deadliest brain tumors with a very low survival rate. Zachary immediately began aggressive treatment. After 12 weeks of treatment, they saw no improvement in his condition. At that time, his doctors sat down with him to discuss options. He was given approximately 6 months to live, giving him the dreaded diagnosis of being terminally ill. They discussed hospice care and other end-of-life options. After surveying the options, Zachary expressed the wish to participate in Physician Aid-In-Dying.
Considering all aspects of the Death With Dignity legislation that has been passed into law in Oregon, consider the following in a paper of
1,000-1,250 words:
1. Does Zachary meet the requirements to take part in this practice? Why? Be detailed and specific in your evaluation of this practice.
2. Considering Death With Dignity legislation, is mental health a component that is evaluated and considered? Do you support this aspect of the legislation?
3. As we near end of life it is often that a surrogate is put in place for our medical decisions. How does this work with the practice of Physician Aid-in-dying?
4. What do you anticipate seeing in the future with this controversial practice in health care?
**PLEASE USE REFERENCES**
**## HLT-305Rubric-PhysicianAid-in-DyingCaseStudy.pdf**
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 1 of 9about:srcdoc
Physician Aid-in-Dying Case Study – Rubric
Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements 18 points
Criteria Description
Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements
5. Excellent 18 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully considers whether the requirements
are met to proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 15.3 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly considers whether the requirements are met to
proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 13.5 points
Essay considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with Physician
Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points
Essay vaguely considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not consider whether the requirements are met to proceed with
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
Collapse All
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 2 of 9about:srcdoc
Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation 17 points
Criteria Description
Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation
5. Excellent 17 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses whether mental health is
a component that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity
legislation.
4. Good 14.45 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses whether mental health is a component
that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
3. Satisfactory 12.75 points
Essay discusses whether mental health is a component that is evaluated and
considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points
Essay vaguely discusses whether mental health is a component that is
evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not discuss whether mental health is a component that is
evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 3 of 9about:srcdoc
Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying 17 points
Criteria Description
Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying
5. Excellent 17 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses how surrogate decision-
making works with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 14.45 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses how surrogate decision-making works
with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 12.75 points
Essay discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the practice of
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points
Essay vaguely discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the
practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not discuss how surrogate decision-making works with the
practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 4 of 9about:srcdoc
The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying 18 points
Criteria Description
The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying
5. Excellent 18 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully anticipates what the future may
hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 15.3 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly anticipates what the future may hold for
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 13.5 points
Essay anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points
Essay vaguely anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not anticipate what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 5 of 9about:srcdoc
Thesis Development and Purpose 7 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent 7 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis
statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good 5.95 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is
descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory 5.25 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 4.55 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 6 of 9about:srcdoc
Argument Logic and Construction 8 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent 8 points
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive
and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good 6.8 points
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are
evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to
conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory 6 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument
presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not
thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction
and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 5.2 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity.
There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable
credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does
not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible
sources.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 7 of 9about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent 5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good 4.25 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The
writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly
distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-
appropriate language are employed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies
in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is
correct but not varied.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 8 of 9about:srcdoc
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and
assignment)
5 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent 5 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good 4.25 points
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting
style.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor
errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A
lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely
followed correctly.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 9 of 9about:srcdoc
Documentation of Sources 5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent 5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to
assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good 4.25 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although
some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
**## PhysicianAidCaseStudyAssignment.docx**
Physician Aid-in-Dying is a practice that is legal in a number of states within the United States due to the passing of the Death with Dignity Act.
Please make sure to research this topic prior to beginning this assignment, as you will need to apply this research to your paper.
_Case Study: Physician Aid-in-Dying in Portland, Oregon_
A 35-year-old male named Zachary Davis has lived in and been a legal resident of Portland for almost 20 years. In the fall of 2018 he began having terrible headaches. After months of suffering with these, Zachary made the decision to see his primary care provider. His provider decided that scans should be done to rule out anything serious before beginning treatment for what he thought was probably migraine headaches. Zachary had the routine scans and at 5:00 p.m. he received a call from his doctor with the results. Zachary was diagnosed with advanced stage glioblastoma multiforme brain cancer, one of the deadliest brain tumors with a very low survival rate. Zachary immediately began aggressive treatment. After 12 weeks of treatment, they saw no improvement in his condition. At that time, his doctors sat down with him to discuss options. He was given approximately 6 months to live, giving him the dreaded diagnosis of being terminally ill. They discussed hospice care and other end-of-life options. After surveying the options, Zachary expressed the wish to participate in Physician Aid-In-Dying.
Considering all aspects of the Death With Dignity legislation that has been passed into law in Oregon, consider the following in a paper of
1,000-1,250 words:
1. Does Zachary meet the requirements to take part in this practice? Why? Be detailed and specific in your evaluation of this practice.
2. Considering Death With Dignity legislation, is mental health a component that is evaluated and considered? Do you support this aspect of the legislation?
3. As we near end of life it is often that a surrogate is put in place for our medical decisions. How does this work with the practice of Physician Aid-in-dying?
4. What do you anticipate seeing in the future with this controversial practice in health care?
**PLEASE USE REFERENCES**
**## HLT-305Rubric-PhysicianAid-in-DyingCaseStudy.pdf**
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 1 of 9about:srcdoc
Physician Aid-in-Dying Case Study – Rubric
Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements 18 points
Criteria Description
Meeting Physician Aid-in-Dying Requirements
5. Excellent 18 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully considers whether the requirements
are met to proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 15.3 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly considers whether the requirements are met to
proceed with Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 13.5 points
Essay considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with Physician
Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points
Essay vaguely considers whether the requirements are met to proceed with
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not consider whether the requirements are met to proceed with
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
Collapse All
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 2 of 9about:srcdoc
Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation 17 points
Criteria Description
Mental Health in Death With Dignity Legislation
5. Excellent 17 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses whether mental health is
a component that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity
legislation.
4. Good 14.45 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses whether mental health is a component
that is evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
3. Satisfactory 12.75 points
Essay discusses whether mental health is a component that is evaluated and
considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points
Essay vaguely discusses whether mental health is a component that is
evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not discuss whether mental health is a component that is
evaluated and considered in Death With Dignity legislation.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 3 of 9about:srcdoc
Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying 17 points
Criteria Description
Surrogate Medical Decisions in Physician Aid-In-Dying
5. Excellent 17 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully discusses how surrogate decision-
making works with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 14.45 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly discusses how surrogate decision-making works
with the practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 12.75 points
Essay discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the practice of
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.05 points
Essay vaguely discusses how surrogate decision-making works with the
practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not discuss how surrogate decision-making works with the
practice of Physician Aid-in-Dying.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 4 of 9about:srcdoc
The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying 18 points
Criteria Description
The Future of Physician Aid-in-Dying
5. Excellent 18 points
Essay clearly, thoroughly, and insightfully anticipates what the future may
hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
4. Good 15.3 points
Essay clearly and thoroughly anticipates what the future may hold for
Physician Aid-in-Dying.
3. Satisfactory 13.5 points
Essay anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 11.7 points
Essay vaguely anticipates what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Essay does not anticipate what the future may hold for Physician Aid-in-Dying.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 5 of 9about:srcdoc
Thesis Development and Purpose 7 points
Criteria Description
Thesis Development and Purpose
5. Excellent 7 points
Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis
statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
4. Good 5.95 points
Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is
descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.
3. Satisfactory 5.25 points
Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 4.55 points
Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 6 of 9about:srcdoc
Argument Logic and Construction 8 points
Criteria Description
Argument Logic and Construction
5. Excellent 8 points
Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive
and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
4. Good 6.8 points
Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are
evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to
conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.
3. Satisfactory 6 points
Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument
presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not
thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction
and conclusion bracket the thesis.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 5.2 points
Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity.
There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable
credibility.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does
not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible
sources.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 7 of 9about:srcdoc
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar,
language use)
5 points
Criteria Description
Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)
5. Excellent 5 points
Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
4. Good 4.25 points
Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The
writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly
distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-
appropriate language are employed.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies
in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is
correct but not varied.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of
meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 8 of 9about:srcdoc
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and
assignment)
5 points
Criteria Description
Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)
5. Excellent 5 points
All format elements are correct.
4. Good 4.25 points
Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting
style.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor
errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A
lack of control with formatting is apparent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely
followed correctly.
5/3/25, 1:44 PM
Page 9 of 9about:srcdoc
Documentation of Sources 5 points
Criteria Description
Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as
appropriate to assignment and style)
5. Excellent 5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to
assignment and style, and format is free of error.
4. Good 4.25 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format
is mostly correct.
3. Satisfactory 3.75 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although
some formatting errors may be present.
2. Less Than Satisfactory 3.25 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Sources are not documented.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)
[https://www.gce.com/](https://www.gce.com/)