NAEYC Code Of Ethics

The ECA’s code of ethics is intends for all early childhood professionals, who work with or on the behalf of children and families, to carry the appropriate behaviour. This document is relevant to my study because it notifies educators about their commitment to the children, families, colleagues, community and society as well as their

The NASW Code of Ethics is the guideline for social workers in regards to professional conduct and practice. The Code of Ethics is divided into four parts: “The Preamble,” “Purpose of the NASW Code of Ethics,” “Ethical Principles,” and “Ethical Standards.” These sections educate social workers on what their mission is, and how they complete that mission with true morality. Within the Code, there are six values presented which are also used in regards to helping and practicing with clients honorably. These six values are: service, social justice, dignity and worth, importance of human relationships, integrity, and competence. These six values are the principles that drive social work practice, and are used by social workers everyday.

In some places, we have guidelines that are known internationally and give a framework for ethical research and this help to push the ethics codes that apply to research carried out in the NHS and universities in the UK.Code of conduct or practice for health and social care professional do not specific include research but the underlying principles of professional practice would be following the same pattern with expectations for ethical research. Below are some ethics principles that support with evidence all research.

The NAEYC Code of Ethical Conduct was developed to uphold the application of core values, ideals, and principles to assist teachers’ decision-making about ethical issues. The Core Values of the NAEYC Code of Ethical Conduct is based on the foundation of the field's commitment to young children. It is noteworthy that all seven of the Code's Core Values directly address our commitment to children:

In this case study, there were a few incidents of violations of ethics. In 1998, Callahan recommends that researchers should follow the three ethical issues: Autonomy, beneficence, and human justice. Autonomy is the first ethical principle that a researcher should respect the participate and make sure that informed consent has been given. The participates of this study was not aware the risk or what the study was about and actually could not give consent legally because they were minors. Johnson and Tudor did not give full disclosure of this research to the minors, teachers, or matrons at the orphanage. Beneficence is the second ethical principle; the researcher should maximize

The NAEYC Code of Ethical Conduct and Statement of Commitment is a guideline designed to help Early Childhood educators and other professionals who work in infant/toddler programs, preschools, child care centers, family child care homes, kindergarten, and primary classrooms in issues that involve young children and their families.

I thought your discussion post this week was great. After looking at exercise 4-4 I completely agree with you that using PRN nurses and working with float nurses is such a smart idea. Decreasing discharge teaching time like the manager wants to do on the unit is unsafe and unethical to patients. The nurses on the unit are doing their part by providing excellent patient care, but reducing education can lead to dangerous outcomes for patients in the long run. Provision 3 of the ANA Code of Ethics (ANA, 2015) states that nurses should promote, advocate, and protect the rights, health, and safety of every patient. By implementing your proposed thoughts I really do believe wait times and patient satisfaction could certainly improve. There are always

Ethics also plays a huge part in making a decision that yields a more positive outcome. Ethical Codes provides a framework and guidance for maintaining obligations to different stakeholders (Follari, 81).NAEYC and NEA both created a code of ethics. The national education association (NEA) code of ethics has two main principles: commitment to the student and commitment to the profession. NAEYC also developed a code of ethics with the intent to “give practitioners a research-based framework for making sound decisions in their work, especially when faced with ethical dilemmas” (Follari , 72). NAEYC code set a framework of professional responsibilities in four sections that address professional relationships that include: children, families, colleagues, and community and society; and in which each section is divided into ideal and principles. (NAECY 2011, pg 2)

The main points of provision five of the ANA code of ethics are as follows: section 5.1, which is moral self-respect, suggests that nurses must care for themselves as much as they care for their patients. Nurses must do their best to maintain professional respect to themselves in regards of their competence and moral character. Section 5.2, which is professional growth and maintenance of competence, suggests that nurses must continue to self and peer evaluate themselves throughout their careers. Nurses must continue to learn current, up to date nursing practices through self, peer, and higher education. Section 5.3, which is wholeness of character, suggests that nurses must develop and take into consideration their own

In current times, children are not getting infected with diseases in order to find curative vaccines, but they are being made part of clinical trials for studies of genetic screening, the enrollment of healthy children in studies of sibling bone marrow donation, and the use of hypothermia for neonates with asphyxia (Laventhal, Tarini & Lantos, 2012). These trial studies have become ethical dilemmas in pediatrics for various reasons, people believe that there are not strong enough regulations for these trials and also that children are not given the opportunity to make their own decisions, most of the time, because children are underage, parents are the ones who make the decision of making their children part of these studies. Current regulations for pediatric clinical trials only require the consent of one parent, unless they are high level risk trials, in which case both parents needs to give approval and the child must also assent. The issue of children given assent for high risk trials is controversial because how do we know that the children really understand the risks that are associated with the trials, do they fully understand that they could possibly get hurt and sometimes their lives can be in danger.

After reading the ANA code of ethics there are various aspects that can relate back to nursing informatics. However, the main sections I would like to discuss would be; provisions two, three, seven, eight and nine.

The Belmont Report identified three principles essential to the ethical conduct of research with humans:

According to Robert Holmes (2006), the ‘power dynamics between adults and children’ present an important obstacle to the collection of high quality evidence from children. Of course, engagement with children and young people is not always at an individual level. There are a variety of issues to think about when engaging with young children. Children and young people may be shy around unfamiliar adults, even at times even afraid, so it is important to find ways of making them feel safe and secure. Explanations for adults having power over children and young people are willingly established in materialistic and paternalistic declarations of looking out for the young children’s best interests, which is to protect them from harm. Most people including young children are in agreement with the involvement of adults is necessary there are however some critics who question this. Roberts, H. (2008) points out that power dynamics in children’s participation are much messier than is often explicated, and that power isn’t something that children

There are three basic principles to consider when evaluating the ethics of a study: 1) respect for persons, 2) beneficence, and 3) justice (Houser, J., 2012, pg. 54-56). To apply these

In the vigorous challenge of the concept of whether children can freely assent in research participations Hurley and Underwood (2002, p.2) indicated that “children’s competence to assent relied too heavily on comprehensive developmental theories such as Piaget’s, which imply that the capacity to assent increases and risk of harm decrease with age.” In any case, it is more difficult for children to give free and meaningful assent” when they did not truly understand the research concepts (2002, p.2). Moreover, the viability of the study depended on the creation of a situation that was ecologically valid in that it was provoking for children and required elements of deception (the other person being an actor and the game being rigged such that participants would not win) and some risk of emotional distress. Personally, I believe that the second graders might not have clearly understood their participation responsibilities and accountabilities, in spite of the definitions given to them in the research study and their capacity to understand to freely give and freely withdraw their assent before and during the research process. The researchers could have used peer tutoring to enhance understanding of the seemingly abstract research concepts to include risks, and effective meaning of voluntary