USA: +1(669)289-8683 
Sign in
n 2–3 pages, address the following:
- Explain your state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult psychiatric emergencies. Include who can hold a patient and for how long, who can release the emergency hold, and who can pick up the patient after a hold is released.
- Explain the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state.
- Explain the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts.
- Select one of the following topics, and explain one legal issue and one ethical issue related to this topic that may apply within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies: patient autonomy, EMTALA, confidentiality, HIPAA privacy rule, HIPAA security rule, protected information, legal gun ownership, career obstacles (security clearances/background checks), and payer source.
- Identify one evidence-based suicide risk assessment that you could use to screen patients.
- Identify one evidence-based violence risk assessment that you could use to screen patients.
Due Apr 20 by 11:59pm
Points 100
Submitting a text entry box or a file upload
Attempts 0
Allowed Attempts 2
Start Assignment
`Back to Week at a Glance
(https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157049/modules/items/6346634)
The diagnosis of psychiatric emergencies can include a wide range of problems—from serious drug reactions to
abuse and suicidal ideation/behaviors. Regardless of care setting, the PMHNP must know how to address
emergencies, coordinate care with other members of the health care team and law enforcement officials (when
indicated), and effectively communicate with family members who are often overwhelmed in emergency
situations. In their role, PMHNPs can ensure a smooth transition from emergency mental health care to follow-up
care, and also bridge the physical–mental health divide in healthcare.
In this week’s Assignment, you explore legal and ethical issues surrounding psychiatric emergencies, and
identify evidence-based suicide and violence risk assessments.
Review this week’s Learning Resources and consider the insights they provide about psychiatric emergencies
and the ethical and legal issues surrounding these events.
LEGAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES RELATED TO
PSYCHIATRIC EMERGENCIES
(https://cdn-
media.waldenu.edu/2dett4d/Walden/Canvas/Getty/OrigImage-
LgRendition/GettyLicense_502180564 )
TO PREPARE
RESOURCES
https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157049/modules/items/6346634
https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157049/modules/items/6346634
https://cdn-media.waldenu.edu/2dett4d/Walden/Canvas/Getty/OrigImage-LgRendition/GettyLicense_502180564
https://cdn-media.waldenu.edu/2dett4d/Walden/Canvas/Getty/OrigImage-LgRendition/GettyLicense_502180564
https://cdn-media.waldenu.edu/2dett4d/Walden/Canvas/Getty/OrigImage-LgRendition/GettyLicense_502180564
https://cdn-media.waldenu.edu/2dett4d/Walden/Canvas/Getty/OrigImage-LgRendition/GettyLicense_502180564
In 2–3 pages, address the following:
Explain your state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult psychiatric emergencies. Include who
can hold a patient and for how long, who can release the emergency hold, and who can pick up the patient after a
hold is released.
Explain the differences among emergency hospitalization for evaluation/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment,
and outpatient commitment in your state.
Explain the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts.
Select one of the following topics, and explain one legal issue and one ethical issue related to this topic that may
apply within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies: patient autonomy, EMTALA, confidentiality, HIPAA
privacy rule, HIPAA security rule, protected information, legal gun ownership, career obstacles (security
clearances/background checks), and payer source.
Identify one evidence-based suicide risk assessment that you could use to screen patients.
Identify one evidence-based violence risk assessment that you could use to screen patients.
Submit your Assignment. Attach copies of or links to the suicide and violence risk assessments you selected.
Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft,
access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.
1. To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK8Assgn_LastName_Firstinitial
2. Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.
3. Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.
Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.
Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.
WEEKLY RESOURCES (https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157049/modules/items/6346641)
THE ASSIGNMENT
BY DAY 7 OF WEEK 8
SUBMISSION INFORMATION
https://waldenu.instructure.com/courses/157049/modules/items/6346641
NRNP_6675_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
1
5 pts
15 pts
10 pts
15 pts
In 2–3 pages, address
the following: • Explain
your state laws for
involuntary psychiatric
holds for child and
adult psychiatric
emergencies. Include
who can hold a patient
and for how long, who
can release the
emergency hold, and
who can pick up the
patient after a hold is
released.
15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–
100%
The response
includes a thorough
and well-organized
explanation of
student’s state laws
for involuntary
psychiatric holds for
child and adult
emergencies.
13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response
includes an accurate
explanation of
student’s state laws
for involuntary
psychiatric holds for
child and adult
emergencies.
11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response
includes a somewhat
vague or inaccurate
explanation of
student’s state laws
for involuntary
psychiatric holds for
child and adult
emergencies.
10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response
includes a vague or
inaccurate
explanation of
student’s state laws
for involuntary
psychiatric holds for
child and adult
emergencies. Or the
response is missing.
• Explain the
differences among
emergency
hospitalization for
evaluation/psychiatric
hold, inpatient
commitment, and
outpatient commitment
in your state.
15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–
100%
The response
includes an accurate
and concise
explanation of the
differences among
emergency
hospitalization for
evaluation/psychiatric
hold, inpatient
commitment, and
outpatient
commitment in your
state.
13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response
includes a well-
organized
explanation of the
differences among
emergency
hospitalization for
evaluation/psychiatric
hold, inpatient
commitment, and
outpatient
commitment in your
state.
11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response
includes a somewhat
vague explanation of
the differences
among emergency
hospitalization for
evaluation/psychiatric
hold, inpatient
commitment, and
outpatient
commitment in your
state.
10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response
includes a vague
explanation of the
differences among
emergency
hospitalization for
evaluation/psychiatric
hold, inpatient
commitment, and
outpatient
commitment in your
state. Or the
response is missing.
• Explain the difference
between capacity and
competency in mental
health contexts.
10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response
includes an accurate
and concise
explanation of the
difference between
capacity and
competency in mental
health contexts.
8 to >7.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response
includes an
accurate
explanation of the
difference between
capacity and
competency in
mental health
contexts.
7 to >6.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response
includes a somewhat
vague or incomplete
explanation of the
difference between
capacity and
competency in
mental health
contexts.
6 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response
includes a vague or
inaccurate
explanation of the
difference between
capacity and
competency in
mental health
contexts. Or the
response is missing.
• Select one of the
following topics and
explain one legal issue
and one ethical issue
15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–
100%
13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Criteria Ratings Pts
15 pts
15 pts
5 pts
related to this topic that
may apply within the
context of treating
psychiatric
emergencies: patient
autonomy, EMTALA,
confidentiality, HIPAA
privacy rule, HIPAA
security rule, protected
information, legal gun
ownership, career
obstacles (security
clearances/background
checks), and payer
source.
The response
accurately and
concisely explains
one legal and one
ethical issue related
to the selected topic,
within the context of
treating psychiatric
emergencies.
The response
accurately explains
one legal and one
ethical issue related
to the selected topic,
within the context of
treating psychiatric
emergencies.
The response
somewhat vaguely or
innacurately explains
one legal and one
ethical issue related
to the selected topic,
within the context of
treating psychiatric
emergencies.
The response
vaguely or
innacurately
explains one legal
and one ethical
issue related to the
selected topic, within
the context of
treating psychiatric
emergencies. Or,
response is missing.
•Identify one evidence-
based suicide risk
assessment that you
could use to screen
patients. Attach a copy
or a link to the
assessment you
identified.
15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response identifies
and explains an
appropriate, evidence-
based suicide risk
assessment that could
be used to screen
patients. A copy of or a
link to the assessment
is included.
13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response
identifies an
appropriate, evidence-
based suicide risk
assessment that could
be used to screen
patients. A copy of or
a link to the
assessment is
included.
11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The risk assessment
identified is
somewhat
inappropriate for the
intended use or
dated. A copy of or a
link to the
assessment may be
missing.
10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The risk
assessment
identified is
inappropriate for
the intended use,
not evidence
based, or dated.
Or, response is
missing.
• Identify one
evidence-based
violence risk
assessment that you
could use to screen
patients. Attach a copy
or a link to the
assessment you
identified.
15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response identifies
and explains an
appropriate, evidence-
based violence risk
assessment that could
be used to screen
patients. A copy of or a
link to the assessment
is included.
13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response
identifies an
appropriate, evidence-
based violence risk
assessment that could
be used to screen
patients. A copy of or
a link to the
assessment is
included.
11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The risk assessment
identified is
somewhat
inappropriate for the
intended use or
dated. A copy of or a
link to the
assessment may be
missing.
10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The risk
assessment
identified is
inappropriate for
the intended use,
not evidence
based, or dated.
Or, response is
missing.
Written Expression and
Formatting – Paragraph
Development and
Organization:
Paragraphs make clear
points that support
well-developed ideas,
flow logically, and
demonstrate continuity
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards for
flow, continuity, and
clarity…. A clear and
comprehensive
4 to >3.5 pts
Good 80%–89%
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards for
flow, continuity, and
clarity 80% of the
time…. Purpose,
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards for
flow, continuity, and
clarity 60%–79% of
the time…. Purpose,
3 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Paragraphs and
sentences follow
writing standards
for flow, continuity,
and clarity < 60%
of the time.... No
Total Points: 100
Criteria Ratings Pts
5 pts
5 pts
of ideas. Sentences
are carefully focused—
neither long and
rambling nor short and
lacking substance. A
clear and
comprehensive
purpose statement and
introduction are
provided that delineate
all required criteria.
purpose statement,
introduction, and
conclusion are
provided that delineate
all required criteria.
introduction, and
conclusion of the
assignment are
stated, yet they are
brief and not
descriptive.
introduction, and
conclusion of the
assignment are vague
or off topic.
purpose
statement,
introduction, or
conclusion were
provided.
Written Expression and
Formatting – English
writing standards:
Correct grammar,
mechanics, and proper
punctuation
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent 90%–
100%
Uses correct
grammar, spelling,
and punctuation
with no errors
4 to >3.5 pts
Good 80%–89%
Contains 1-2
grammar, spelling,
and punctuation
errors
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Contains 3-4
grammar, spelling,
and punctuation
errors
3 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Contains five or more
grammar, spelling, and
punctuation errors that
interfere with the reader’s
understanding
Written Expression and
Formatting – The paper
follows correct APA
format for title page,
headings, font,
spacing, margins,
indentations, page
numbers,
parenthetical/in-text
citations, and
reference list.
5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
Uses correct APA
format with no errors
4 to >3.5 pts
Good 80%–89%
Contains 1-2 APA
format errors
3.5 to >3.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
Contains 3-4 APA
format errors
3 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
Contains five or more
APA format errors
