Discussion: Biological Basis and Ethical/Legal Considerations of Psychotherapy

Many studies have found that psychotherapy is as effective as psychopharmacology in terms of influencing changes in behaviors, symptoms of anxiety, and changes in mental state. Changes influenced by psychopharmacology can be explained by the biological basis of treatments. But how does psychotherapy achieve these changes? Does psychotherapy share common neuronal pathways with psychopharmacology?

Psychotherapy is used with individuals as well as in groups or families. The idea of discussing confidential information with a patient in front of an audience is probably quite foreign to you. However, in group and family therapy, this is precisely what the psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner does. In your role, learning how to provide this type of therapy within the limits of confidentiality is essential.

For this Discussion, you will consider whether psychotherapy also has a biological basis and analyze the ways in which legal and ethical considerations differ in the individual, family, and group therapy settings.

To prepare:

  • Review this week’s Learning Resources, reflecting on foundational concepts of psychotherapy, biological and social impacts on psychotherapy, and legal and ethical issues across the modalities (individual, family, and group).
  • Search the Walden Library databases for scholarly, peer-reviewed articles that inform and support your academic perspective on these topics.

By Day 3

Post an explanation of whether psychotherapy has a biological basis. Explain how culture, religion, and socioeconomics might influence one’s perspective on the value of psychotherapy treatments. Describe how legal and ethical considerations for group and family therapy differ from those for individual therapy, and explain how these differences might impact your therapeutic approaches for clients in group, individual, and family therapy. Support your rationale with at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources and explain why each of your supporting sources is considered scholarly. Attach the PDFs of your sources. 

 

Rubric Detail

 

Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.

 

Name: NRNP_6645_Week1_Discussion_Rubric

 

Excellent Point range: 90–100

Good Point range: 80–89

Fair Point range: 70–79

Poor Point range: 0–69

Main Posting: Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s). Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to most of the discussion question(s). Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least 3 credible references.

31 (31%) – 34 (34%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.

0 (0%) – 30 (30%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s). Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only 1 or no credible references.

Main Posting: Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely. Contains no grammatical or spelling errors. Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely. May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors. Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely. May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Posting: Timely and full participation

9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts main discussion by due date.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Posts main discussion by due date. Meets requirements for full participation.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main discussion by due date.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post main discussion by due date.

First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.

First Response: Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.

First Response: Timely and full participation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.

Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Responds to questions posed by faculty. The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic, may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.

Second Response: Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues. Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed. Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources. Response is written in Standard, Edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication. Response to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.

Second Response: Timely and full participation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation. Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation. Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation. Does not post by due date.

 

 

"Get 15% discount on your first 3 orders with us"
Use the following coupon
FIRST15

Order Now
CategoryUncategorized
Write a comment:

*

Your email address will not be published.

For order inquiries        1-800-700-6200

Hi there! Click one of our representatives below and we will get back to you as soon as possible.

Chat with us on WhatsApp