My cultural identity is based on an ethni y diverse belonging, in which it synthesizes a broader view of dissociation from ethnic bias. I am constrained to such an identity since it is a mode of promotion of the culture and diversity in the healthcare practice. In arriving at this identity of diversity in the culture, I took the role of understanding of the individual affiliations of the diversity of culture in the patient fraternity, where there was an analysis of the aspects of health needs among the affiliate cultural identities of the patient fraternity (Harris, 2010). These aspects range from the number of patients in the emergency care, the in-patient fraternity, and the outpatient fraternity. On the other hand, diversity in the religious and group identity forms the nature of description of the affiliate identity to which I belong. This implies that my healthcare practice does not put an emphasis of belonging to an affiliate group of religion and group identity, where equal consideration of the affiliate religious instincts and group identities forms the basis of defining my healthcare ethical issues (Morrison, 2009).
In arriving at the belief in the diversity in identities that span from diverse cultural identity to the diverse religious and group identity, I evaluated the patient population in relation to the affiliate group, cultural, and religious identity. This gave me number of patients having the requirement of service from the healthcare practitioner belonging to diversity in terms of the individual identities. Moreover, the diversity in the patient fraternity gave me the consideration of diversity in the nursing practitioner, in which the two work in common. I also considered the cultural formation between the patient fraternity and the nursing fraternity that gave rise to a community with similar cultural, religious, and group identity ventures, which revealed diversity. This also means that I do not portent the ability to be constrained to a single cultural, religious or group identity because the healthcare ethics do not grant this opportunity of working in isolation. Doing so would reveal my deviation from the normal, while the consequences would be dire, which I would term as healthcare service that is based on discrimination (Panicola, 2007).
My personal take on morality is that it is the ability to act in a manner that upholds sanity during times of discretion. In defining so, I tend to imply that it is the ability of discerning the difference between what is ethi y right and wrong. My individual morality has been upheld in the healthcare fraternity through overseeing the process of office and by observance of the ethics of the nursing fraternity. Morality is evidently the tool of guidance during the process of decision making at critical times in the healthcare fraternity, where I am expected to act in good faith. Moreover, I uphold certain incidences that enable me in the synthesis of morality into the healthcare practice as in the case of prescription of a certain kind of treatment or an intervention program for promotion of health. For instance, I need to practice the nursing ethics as practitioner through guidance by morals to synchronize the best outcomes from the practice amid varied constraints (Power, 2007).
In the development of my personal morality, which includes values like honesty, confidentiality, and acting in good faith, I evaluated the constraints of deviating from the normal. Consequently, I defined the approach of elimination mode of action, where the consequences of acting in bad faith, lack of honesty, and deviation from confidentiality could elucidate the results, whose impact would be weighed against acting in accordance with the moral values (Harris, 2010). By consideration, constraining myself to morality in healthcare practice is a tool for shaping the lives of patients and the society at large, where deviations from the values of morality could lead to dire consequences including death. From this I bear a challenge as a practitioner with the responsibility of oath of office to act in a morally upright manner for the correct definition of the professional ethics of the nursing fraternity to which I belong (Morrison, 2009).
The individual morality values develop at infancy, while the societal and group morality values are influenced by believes and cultural norms that are most evident. This is evident from the fact that individuals respond to critical times of decision making from past experiences or from what they uphold from infancy that influences the individual morality values. On the contrast, the societal and group morality values are highly dependent on the societal beliefs and what is considered as agreed upon by a valuable majority. Consequently, whilst the individual morality values are independent, the societal and group morality values are dependent on the prevailing conditions in which they change with the nature of the environment under jurisdiction. In the healthcare systems, individual morality is based on personal actions that are deemed to be morally upright, while the societal and group morality values are acquired through professional teachings from experts (Panicola, 2007).
The types of individual morality values include the ability to control all the cognitive aspects of the human nature, which include the emotions, articulation of the theory of the mind, and ability to express empathy (Masters, 2009). These values are evidently influential in critical decision making processes in the healthcare fraternity, where they influence the end result of a discretion process. On the other hand, the societal morality values are evidently shaped by the societal norms, where one is morally expected to act in a sound manner according to the regulations and obligations therein. Moreover, the group morality values range from peer pressure and how it influences the sound judgment that is based on the beliefs and customs of the group. This ranges from mob psychology to an industrial action such as strike. This elucidates the consideration of the societal and group morality values as being dependent, since the resultant decision in critical times is influenced by the beliefs and customs of the group as opposed to articulation of what one knows as being right from infancy (Power, 2007).
The exemplary moral leader I admire is Sandra J. Sucher, who teaches morals by actions. By definition, a moral leader is one with the capabilities of leading with morality, where he or she has the capabilities of acting as a role model. Sandra J. Sucher has been the echelon behind my scenic acquisition of morality, where she has advanced her research to incorporate the face of dealing with the challenges of morality, especially during critical times of decision making processes (Morrison, 2009). She is my moral leader since she has the capabilities of defining leadership as a role that is “inevitably presented with the moral and ethical choices” (Panicola, 2007). This implies that raising the echelon of leadership is easy, but to keep pace with the ethical and moral challenges therein, is more difficult. She, therefore, synthesizes to me the need to articulate the values of morality in order to lead with morals.
Consequently, following the path of success in the healthcare, fraternity is void without articulation of the values of morality. This has necessitated my personal desire to walk in the footsteps of Sandra J. Sucher since it offers a relief to the challenges and expectations of the healthcare practice through the mirror of morality (Sucher, 2007). I therefore choose her as the moral leader since her approach could elucidate viability of achievement. This implies that Sucher is my preferred moral leader, since she has the capability of shaping the personal moral values through proving that there are no impossibilities. Moreover, she is a tool for shaping my individual morality values, for she defines morality by action. From this I get the challenge of reciprocating through putting in action what is considered morally upright as a form of shaping my individual personality (Power, 2007). By consideration, she is a form of translation of moral values into practice, where my individual moral values within the healthcare practice could improve through daily practice.
Deontology is the course of action that is based on the adherence of rules and regulations, while utilitarianism is the theory that elucidates the validity of a proper action that is deemed to bear more utility than economic disadvantages (Masters, 2009). As much as deontology uses the application of actions according to rules and regulations, the theory of utilitarianism has a probabilistic ending, in which the course of action is determined by the end. This is to imply that the theory of deontology emphasizes that the means justifies the end, while ethical utilitarianism bases on the fact that the end justifies the means. The major similarity between the theory of ethical deontology and utilitarianism lies in the end results, where sound judgment forms the constant factor for the end of a decision making process. This implies that in both cases, the end results should be the ones that are upheld with ethical morality (Morrison, 2009).
The basic example of applied deontology that is important to my course is the rules and regulations that are signed in proving the quality of a healthcare practitioner. As a healthcare practitioner, I need to act in response to the rules and regulations of the professional board, in which actions like prescription of a medical care service entirely depends on the regulations of the medical practice. Moreover, as a medical practitioner I am expected to act in a morally sound manner when addressing the plight of the patient to protect life, as opposed to an action that could endanger the life of the patient. This implies that my course of action as a medical practitioner is restricted by the professional ethics that acquired during the practice sessions and the regulations in the field of practice. Moreover, a deviation from such a norm elucidates a number of consequences which provides the restrictions of acting in a morally ethical manner in order to give the best end results of promotion of health (Panicola, 2007).