professional discourse of health issue that results in enquity or harm (CANADIAN)

Assignment 1 invites you to conduct an analysis of a problematic professional discourse in clinical practice or a health issue that results in inequity or harm. This assignment will be a maximum of 10 pages in length, excluding the title page, abstract and references.

Choose a health-related topic relevant to your practice setting or community. If you are unsure if your topic is appropriate for the assignment, discuss with your course instructor in the Assignment Discussion Forum

Locate 8-10 scholarly research articles that will inform your analysis of your chosen discourse. Be sure that your references are peer reviewed research articles rather than opinion/editorial, or review articles (e.g., systematic, literature, discussion).

Next, analyze these articles to show how the assumptions of the empirical, constructivist and critical paradigms influence the knowledge that was produced. For example, the assumptions of the paradigms may influence research questions, research methods, data analysis, and conclusions. In this way, the paradigms influence what is known and what can be known from the research studies/articles. Your analysis will demonstrate your understanding of how the assumptions of the paradigms influence knowledge production and then how this knowledge shapes power and culture.

One way to start writing this section is to create a table where you will identify the dominant paradigm(s) in each of your chosen papers to ensure that you have at least two of the paradigms included and then group them together for your analysis of their impact on the knowledge generated.

Here is a sample of one student’s analysis of the impact of the positivist paradigm in research related to Suicidal Behaviour in the Canadian Aboriginal Population (used with permission):

The quantitative data evident in the literature discusses incidence and prevalence of suicidal behaviour and associated risk factors (Kumar et al., 2012; Elias et al., 2012). Fraser et al. (2014) quantitatively analyzed risk factors contributing to suicidal behaviour including substance abuse, self-reports of low self-esteem, violence exposure and even protective factors including participation in events and found correlations between such risk factors and the increase in suicidal behaviour while protective factors assist in lowering suicidal behaviour.

Additionally, Elias et al. (2012) empirically examined the link between residential school attendance and abuse exposure to suicidal behavior in those who attended residential schooling as well as to the descendants of those who attended, signifying the concept of intergenerational trauma and its relation to suicidal beahviour. This fits in with the assumptions of the positivist research domain that seek to identify cause and effect relationships. Further supporting the discourse on the biomedical, positivist model, Bombay, Matheson & Anisman (2014) recommend future researchers seek to find epigenetic and biologic predispositions in the Aboriginal populations that would predispose one to negative effects from intergenerational trauma. However, these authors caution that involvement from participants by DNA sampling would be unlikely due to historical disappointments from past research experiences (Bombay, Matheson, & Anisman, 2014).

Use the following guide and headings to write your analysis of the professional discourse

A. Introduction and Background to the Topic

• Provide a brief (less than a page) background to the topic to establish the context for the paper. You will need all of the remaining 9 pages to cover the requirements for this paper.

B. Approach to the Literature Search

• Provide a brief (one paragraph) description of the methods used to locate the literature reviewed for the paper. The search terms and limits you placed on the search strategy influence the types of articles you located and therefore, your search strategies shape the discourse.

C. The Paradigms (40%)

• Using the assumptions of the paradigms, analyze your chosen peer reviewed articles to explain how the knowledge in the articles was produced.

• Justify your analysis by referring to the paradigms’ underlying assumptions and specific examples from the articles. Discuss how the assumptions of the paradigm used by the authors influence the research questions, purpose of the article, research methods including analysis and conclusions, or recommendations for practice.

• Which paradigm dominates the discourse? Why?

D. Power Relations (25%)

• Using the findings from your discourse analysis (not your practice), describe how the professional literature establishes and maintains power relations.
• A common mistake is to apply your clinical or expert opinion to describe why the power imbalances exist. Resist this temptation. Use your chosen literature. You will use your expertise in the next assignment.
• How are the power relations among the differing parties (patients, health care providers, government) depicted in the discourse about the topic?
• Which parties are more powerful, and which are less powerful?
• How does the discourse silence certain perspectives?
• What views and voices are not heard?

E. Cultural Issues (15%)

• How are cultural variables considered or represented in the discourse?
• For instance, how are social class, gender, race/ethnicity, age, sexual preference, disease or disability, the culture of health professions/systems, or other cultural variables represented in the discourse?

F. Conclusion