Non-Punitive Treatment for Pregnant and Breastfeeding Women with Substance Abuse Disorder

For this essay, you are required to:

• Focus on one this topic listed below
• • • Topic 3: Non-Punitive Treatment for Pregnant and Breastfeeding Women with Substance Abuse Disorders (Full ANA Position Statement: https://www.nursingworld.org/~4af078/globalassets/docs/ana/ethics/nonpunitivetreatment-pregnantbreastfeedingwomen-sud.pdf) 
      
      • Abbreviated ANA Position Statement: “ANA supports the fact that substance use disorders are diseases that require treatment, not incarceration. Pregnant and breast-feeding women with substance use disorder require treatment from a rehabilitation program, . . . [and a] limited number of alcohol and other drug abuse treatment services are presently available for pregnant or postpartum women. Inpatient treatment services should be amenable to infants residing with their mothers.  ANA supports an increase in federal, state, and local funds for development and expansion of alcohol and other substance use treatment services tailored to meet the special needs of childbearing women and their children. . . ANA further supports research that examines the root causes related to the health and welfare of pregnant women with substance use disorder who are incarcerated or under correctional supervision.”

    • . Follow the problem-solving organizational pattern that is shown below:

      • Introduction
        • Components: Problem definition and general history, thesis statement
      • Cause Analysis
        • Simple Causes
        • Root Causes
      • Effects Examination
        • Short-term effects/consequences
        • Long-term effects/consequences
      • Current Solution Examination
        • Describe
        • Analyze successes
        • Analyze failures
      • Solution Proposal
        • Short- and long-term solutions
        • Potential challenges
      • Conclusion 
      • • Produce developed body paragraphs with strong topic sentences, cited support, and concluding sentences
        • Use at least six (6)  unique sources, cited and referenced properly in APA style (no more than 20% of essay consists of quoted text)
        • Incorporate research-based APA Style cited support through quoting and paraphrasing for all claims/examinations
        • Meet or exceed 1,400 words (excludes cover page and references page)

      Criteria	Outstanding (10-9 points)	Good (8 points)	Competent (7 points)	Needs work (6-0 points)	Criterion Score
      Introduction (research-based, clearly introduces the problem (approved ANA federal advocacy issue), provides a basic history of the program, and concludes with strong thesis statement) 10 POINTS	10 points The paper begins with a strong, research-based introduction that clearly introduces a problem from the ANA’s selected federal advocacy issues.  A general overview of the problem’s history is present. It concludes with a clear, strong thesis statement (not an announcement) that indicates both the problem and the proposed solution.	8 points The paper begins with a satisfactory, research-based introduction that introduces a problem from the ANA’s selected federal advocacy issues.  A general overview of the problem’s history is present.  It concludes with a satisfactory thesis statement (not an announcement) that indicates both the problem and the proposed solution	7 points The paper begins with an introduction, which is somewhat research-based, that introduces a problem from the ANA’s selected federal advocacy issues.  A basic overview of the problem’s history is present. It concludes with a general thesis statement (not an announcement) that indicates both the problem and the proposed solution.	6 points The paper begins with an introduction, which may or may not be research-based, that somewhat introduces a problem, which may or may not be from the ANA’s selected federal advocacy issues.  An overview of the problem’s history may or may not be present. It concludes with a thesis statement that may or may not clearly express the problem and solution; it may or may not be incorrectly in the form of an announcement.	Score of Introduction (research-based, clearly introduces the problem (approved ANA federal advocacy issue), provides a basic history of the program, and concludes with strong thesis statement) 10 POINTS, / 10

      Criteria	Outstanding (20-18 points)	Good (17-16 points)	Competent (15-14 points)	Needs work (13-0 points)	Criterion Score
      Cause Analysis (research-based, examines causes, strong paragraph development) 20 POINTS	20 points Reveals a strong understanding of the ANA federal advocacy issue’s (problem’s) surface (simple) and root (complex) causes. Examination goes beyond surface level contributing factors, providing readers with a thorough, research-based examination.	17 points Reveals a good understanding of the ANA federal advocacy issue’s (problem’s) surface (simple) and root (complex) causes.  Examination goes somewhat beyond surface level contributing factors, providing readers with a research-based examination.	15 points Reveals a general understanding of the ANA federal advocacy issue’s (problem’s) surface (simple) and root (complex) causes.  Examination may or may not go beyond surface level contributing factors, providing readers with a research-based examination.	13 points Reveals a moderate or limited understanding of the ANA federal advocacy issue’s (problem’s) surface (simple) and root (complex) causes.    Examination primarily focuses on surface level contributing factors; examination may or may not be research-based.	Score of Cause Analysis (research-based, examines causes, strong paragraph development) 20 POINTS, / 20

      Criteria	Outstanding (20-18 points)	Good (17-16 points)	Competent (15-14 points)	Needs work (13-0 points)	Criterion Score
      Effects Analysis (research-based, short- and long-term effects, strong paragraph development) 20 POINTS	20 points Reveals a strong understanding of the ANA federal advocacy issue’s (problem’s) effects, and both short- and long-term consequences are thoroughly examined. Examination goes beyond surface level effects/consequences, providing readers with a thorough, research-based examination.	17 points Reveals a good understanding of the ANA federal advocacy issue’s (problem’s)  effects, and both short- and long-term consequences are examined. Examination goes somewhat beyond surface level effects/ consequences, providing readers with a research-based examination.	15 points Reveals a general understanding of the ANA federal advocacy issue’s (problem’s)  effects, and both short- and long-term consequences are examined. Examination may or may not go beyond surface level effects/ consequences, providing readers with a research-based examination.	13 points Reveals a moderate or limited understanding of the ANA federal advocacy issue’s (problem’s) effects, and both short- and long-term consequences may or may not be examined. Examination primarily focuses on surface level effects/ consequences; examination may or may not be research-based.	Score of Effects Analysis (research-based, short- and long-term effects, strong paragraph development) 20 POINTS, / 20

      Criteria	Outstanding (15-14 points)	Good (13-12 points)	Competent (11 points)	Needs work (10-0 points)	Criterion Score
      Solution Examination (research-based, examines current and past solutions, identifies the successes and failures of each, strong paragraph development) 15 POINTS	15 points Provides a strong, thorough research-based examination of both current and past solutions. Successes and failures are thoroughly explored.	13 points Provides a  good research-based examination of both current and past solutions. Successes and failures are explored.	11 points Provides a  general research-based examination. Current and past solutions. Successes and failures may or may not be fully explored.	10 points Provides a  moderate or limited examination, which may or may not be research-based. Current and past solutions. Successes and failures  may or may not be fully explored.	Score of Solution Examination (research-based, examines current and past solutions, identifies the successes and failures of each, strong paragraph development) 15 POINTS, / 15

      Criteria	Outstanding (20-18 points)	Good (17-16 points)	Competent (15-14 points)	Needs work (13-0 points)	Criterion Score
      Solution Proposal (research-based, proposes solutions, addresses challenges, strong paragraph development) 20 POINTS	20 points Provides a strong, thorough research-based proposal of solutions; potential challenges are examined and addressed.	17 points Provides a good research-based proposal of solutions; potential challenges are examined and addressed.	15 points Provides a general research-based proposal. Solutions may or may not be fully explored. Potential challenges are examined may or may not be addressed.	13 points Provides a moderate or limited proposal, which may or may not be research-based. Solutions may or may not be fully explored. Potential challenges are examined may or may not be addressed.	Score of Solution Proposal (research-based, proposes solutions, addresses challenges, strong paragraph development) 20 POINTS, / 20

      Criteria	Outstanding (10-9 points)	Good (8 points)	Competent (7 points)	Needs work (6-0 points)	Criterion Score
      APA Style 10 POINTS	10 points There are 0-2 APA Style formatting errors.	8 points There are more than 2 APA Style formatting errors.	7 points There are more than 4 APA Style formatting errors.	6 points There are more than 5 APA Style formatting errors.	Score of APA Style 10 POINTS, / 10

      Criteria	Outstanding (5 points)	Good (4 points)	Competent (3 points)	Needs work (2-0 points)	Criterion Score
      MUGS MECHANICS, USAGE, GRAMMAR, SPELLING 5 POINTS	5 points This piece has been revised and edited well. There may be a few errors, but they do not detract from the readability of the piece.	4 points A good solid attempt at revising and editing has been made. Only a few MUGS errors remain, but they don’t detract from the readability of the piece too badly.	3 points While an attempt at revising and editing has been made, there are still several errors that detract from the readability of the piece.	2 points This paper was not revised and/or edited carefully. Many errors detract from the readability of the essay.	Score of MUGS MECHANICS, USAGE, GRAMMAR, SPELLING 5 POINTS, / 5