Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

NRNP Week 6 Discussion: Psychotherapy for Addictive Disorders

NRNP Week 6 Discussion: Psychotherapy for Addictive Disorders

“A long-standing debate has roiled over whether addicts have a choice over their
behaviors. The disease creates distortions in thinking, feelings, and perceptions, which
drive people to behave in ways that are not understandable to others around them. Simply
put, addiction is not a choice. Addictive behaviors are a manifestation of the disease, not a
cause. "
–Dr. Raju Hajela, former president of the Canadian Society of Addiction Medicine
A common misconception is that addiction is a choice, and addicts are often labeled as
individuals who lack morals, willpower, or responsibility. However, addiction is a clinical
disorder that must be treated with the support of a health care professional. Although
many people who are exposed to potentially addictive substances and behaviors continue
life unaltered by their experiences, some people are fueled by these experiences and spiral
out of control. In your role as the psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner, you must be
prepared to not only work with these individuals who struggle with addiction, but also help
them and their families overcome the social stigmas associated with addictive behavior.
This week, as you explore psychotherapy for addiction, you assess clients presenting with
addictive disorders. You also examine therapies for treating these clients and consider
potential outcomes.
Photo Credit: Laureate Education

Learning Resources
Required Readings
Wheeler, K. (Ed.). (2014). Psychotherapy for the advanced practice psychiatric nurse: A how-
to guide for evidence-based practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing
Company.
 Chapter 7, “Motivational Interviewing” (pp. 299–312)
 Chapter 16, “Psychotherapeutic Approaches for Addictions and Related Disorders”
(pp. 565–596)

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

NRNP Week 6 Discussion Psychotherapy for Addictive Disorders

NRNP Week 6 Discussion Psychotherapy for Addictive Disorders

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS:NRNP Week 6 Discussion: Psychotherapy for Addictive Disorders

Albrecht, U., Kirschner, N. E., & Grusser, S. M. (2007). Diagnostic instruments for
behavioral addiction: An overview. German Medical Science Psycho-Social-Medicine, 4,
1–11. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2736529/

Fisher, M. A. (2016a). The ethical ABCs of conditional confidentiality. In Confidentiality
limits in psychotherapy: Ethics checklists for mental health professionals (pp. 13–25).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14860-002

Required Media
Laureate Education (Producer). (2013c). Levy family: Episodes 1 [Video file]. Baltimore,
MD: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 2 minutes.

Accessible player
Laureate Education (Producer). (2013c). Levy family: Episodes 2 [Video file]. Baltimore,
MD: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 2 minutes.

Accessible player
Laureate Education (Producer). (2013c). Levy family: Episodes 3 [Video file]. Baltimore,
MD: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 6 minutes.

Accessible player
Laureate Education (Producer). (2013c). Levy family: Episodes 4 [Video file]. Baltimore,
MD: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 5 minutes.

Accessible player
Laureate Education (Producer). (2013c). Levy family: Episodes 5 [Video file]. Baltimore,
MD: Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 2 minutes.

Accessible player
Laureate Education (Producer). (2012c). In their own words [Video file]. Baltimore, MD:
Author.

Note: The approximate length of this media piece is 23 minutes.

Accessible player
Optional Resources

Dronen, S. O. (2012). New research about Facebook addiction. Retrieved from
http://www.uib.no/en/news/36380/new-research-about-facebook-addiction

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2005). Substance abuse
treatment for adults in the criminal justice system. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP)
Series 44. Rockville, MD: Author. Retrieved from
https://store.samhsa.gov/system/files/sma13-4056.pdf

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2013). Substance abuse
treatment for persons with co-occurring disorders: A treatment improvement protocol.
Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 42. Rockville, MD: Author. Retrieved from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK64197/

Name:  Discussion Rubric

  Excellent

90–100

Good

80–89

Fair

70–79

Poor

0–69

Main Posting:

Response to the Discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Thoroughly responds to the Discussion question(s).

Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three current credible sources.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to most of the Discussion question(s).

Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth.

Supported by at least three credible references.

31 (31%) – 34 (34%)

Responds to some of the Discussion question(s).

One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Cited with fewer than two credible references.

0 (0%) – 30 (30%)

Does not respond to the Discussion question(s).

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

Contains only one or no credible references.

Main Posting:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Written clearly and concisely.

Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Written concisely.

May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.

Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Written somewhat concisely.

May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Not written clearly or concisely.

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Posting:

Timely and full participation

9 (9%) – 10 (10%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts main Discussion by due date.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Posts main Discussion by due date.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post main Discussion by due date.

First Response:

Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.

9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

First Response:

Writing

6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

First Response:

Timely and full participation

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Second Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.
9 (9%) – 9 (9%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

Responds to questions posed by faculty.

The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

8 (8%) – 8 (8%)

Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.

7 (7%) – 7 (7%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

0 (0%) – 6 (6%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

Second Response:
Writing
6 (6%) – 6 (6%)

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.

Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.

Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.

Response is written in standard, edited English.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Response posed in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication.

Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

Few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 3 (3%)

Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective communication.

Response to faculty questions are missing.

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response:
Timely and full participation
5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.

Posts by due date.

4 (4%) – 4 (4%)

Meets requirements for full participation.

Posts by due date.

3 (3%) – 3 (3%)

Posts by due date.

0 (0%) – 2 (2%)

Does not meet requirements for full participation.

Does not post by due date.

Total Points: 100

Name:  Discussion Rubric

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.