Debate on Philosophical Basis of Citizenship and Personalisation - Essay Example

? Reflective Journal Log - Personalisation and Citizenship January 11, Reflective Journal Log - Personalisation and Citizenship Introduction Persons with learning disabilities often suffer from discrimination. The research delves on the discrimination of persons with learning disabilities. The research delves on the current stance on persons with learning disabilities. United Kingdom laws and other statutes ensure that persons with learning disabilities are propped up as equal beneficiaries of the rights and duties allocated to all United Kingdom residents. 1. Reflective Critical debate on philosophical basis of Citizenship and Personalisation of persons with learning disabilities. Reflective analysis indicates that every person, including persons with learning disabilities, can exercise all the rights of citizenship and personalization, without discrimination. Historically, students suffered from social or school exclusion because of their learning disabilities. Presently, schools are prevented from discriminating against persons with learning disabilities. Persons with a learning disability have the right to exercise all the rights of being a citizen of the state (Carr 2010). Persons with learning disabilities include those with below 71 intelligence quotient score. Such persons have the right to determine their own future, participate in beneficial community affairs, and contribute to improving the community life in the United Kingdom. Consequently, personalization is correctly explained as the cornerstone of United Kingdom public service because all individuals, especially the persons with learning disabilities, are granted the power for self determination and receive services that will alleviate their current learning disability effects (DH 2008). Additionally, the persons with learning disabilities have the right to equal opportunities to survive in our United Kingdom society and in any place in the world (Carr 2010). As citizens, persons with learning disabilities can exercise the right to find jobs. The same persons can exercise their right to freely access buildings and other places. Such persons can have access to learning what they prefer in life. For example, the persons with learning disabilities can choose to study cooking lessons. Another person with learning disability can freely enroll in United Kingdom’s best law schools. A third person can prefer to learn to be a future high school teacher. No one or no group has the right to prevent the persons with learning disabilities from exercising their right to act and feel as equal members of United Kingdom society. In terms of government services, the persons with learning disabilities have the right to receive benefits and help from the government in the same manner as the persons without learning disabilities. Likewise, the persons with learning disabilities can exercise their right to contribute their suggestions, complaints, disgruntlement, and other opinions to the community’s government policies. Healthcare services must comply with established discrimination-free United Kingdom standards (Taylor-Gooby, 2010) The teachers, administrators, and healthcare professors must help remove the persons with learning disabilities’ feelings of being excluded from the group or class activities (Johns, 2004). The stakeholders should go out of their way to make the persons with learning disabilities feel that they are welcome in the group by inviting them, not discriminating them. Persons with learning disabilities have the right, to contribute their equal share to the uplifting of the social, economic, and political, civic, and community life in the United Kingdom. For example, the persons with learning disabilities can run for mayor in the community. Other persons with learning disabilities can freely set up a grocery business or a restaurant business. A second person with learning disability can freely join the lions club or any nonprofit organization that helps other economically deprived members of United Kingdom improve their current economic plight (Taylor-Gooby, 2010). Historically, some laws focused on persons with learning disabilities. The laws include the 1845 Lunacy Act (Nolan, 1993). Another law is the 1913 Mental deficiency Act (Thomas, 2002). Later laws include 1989 Caring for People White Paper (White 2010). The 2001 White Paper Valuing People focuses on rights, inclusion, choice and independence (Bollard, 2009). Further, supporting service models of practice is composed of several areas. One area is health care. Another area is education. A third area is employment. A fourth area is residential and domicile services (Dimopoulos, 2010). Initially, persons with learning disabilities should be pictured as persons who can do something, replacing the historical image of picturing the persons with learning disabilities as person who cannot do something. For example, the persons with learning disabilities should be pictured as persons with other beneficial capacities. The beneficial capacities include one person being a good singer. Another person with learning disability can have a beneficial capacity to make top quality architectural masterpieces. A third person with learning disability can be looked upon as a person who is able to generate high retail outlet sales, a marketing success story (Taylor-Gooby, 2010). Similarly, the persons with learning disabilities have the same duty as other normal members of United Kingdom society. For example, the persons with learning disabilities must not violate any of the nation’s environmental protection laws. The same persons must protect the state from external invaders or threats. The persons with learning disabilities should work in order to feed one’s family. The same persons who have their own businesses should pay the minimum wage to each employee. Each person with learning disability has the duty to help keep the peace and stability of the community, preventing chaos (Carr 2010). 2. Reflective Analysis of policy on local and national level on personalization promotion of persons with learning disabilities Reflective analysis indicates that the four countries of the United Kingdom should continue to rightfully focus on the nursing profession as the field assigned to helping people with learning disabilities (Barr, 2008). As part of their nursing foundation training, the United Kingdom nurses are professionally trained to personally cater to the diverse needs of to persons with learning disabilities. Additional professional training hones the health care professional’s personalization care of the persons with learning disabilities. The healthcare professionals include the nurses, social workers, and medical doctors. The additional trainings include the United Kingdom’s Learning Disability Awards Framework (LDAF). The seminar leads to the granting of certificates to individuals who pass the rigorous exams. The trainings are classified as Learning Disability Qualifications (LDQ). Consequently, the trainings augment the current pesonalisation training of healthcare professionals who are assigned to persons with learning disabilities. Further, many reports of lackluster personalization services provided to persons with learning disabilities are grounded on the need for specialized training. The United Kingdom government’s new thrust shift to personalization healthcare services needs to be backed up by appropriate health care training. There had been many reports that the patients were not happy with the current healthcare services of United Kingdom government indicated that there is a need for education the healthcare workers to learn the latest personalization procedures required for persons with learning disabilities. Training the healthcare staff will ensure better personalization procedures (Barr, 2008). Furthermore, the government seeks to equip the healthcare professional with all the necessary theories to ensure that more effective delivery of healthcare services to the persons with learning disabilities. Included in the training is how to effectively deal with the families of the persons with learning disabilities. The trainings will include how to better maximize the tools needed to support the nurses’ assessment and planning roles. Likewise, the education of the nurses will include evaluating the effectiveness of the education and the healthcare procedures needed to generate a lasting beneficial effect on the persons with learning disabilities (Barr, 2008). More importantly, there is a need for professionalizing healthcare services allocated to the persons with learning disabilities. Demographic research shows that there is a one half percent increase in the number of persons classified as persons with learning disabilities within two years. The increase is to the longer lifespan of persons with learning disabilities. Longer lifespan is grounded on better healthcare services. Healthcare services include diagnosis of individuals for the onset of learning disability, better care of persons with learning disabilities, and better treatment of ailments such as low intelligence quotient of the persons with learning disabilities. With more elderly people classified as persons with learning disabilities as well as more children falling under the persons with learning disabilities classification, there is an increasing need for personalising the healthcare needs of the patients. Consequently, there is more need for surgical operations, medical intervention, and intensive nursing care procedures (Barr, 2008). In addition, demographic research shows that longer living persons with learning disabilities precipitate to the need for increasing healthcare processes. The healthcare processes include the area of morbidity and mortality of the healthcare patients. The healthcare and social care professionals need additional clinical knowledge and skills to effectively respond to each problem situation arising from caring for the basic needs of the persons with learning disabilities, especially in the area of cerebrovascular disease and cancer research. Due to their learning disabilities, the family caregivers and healthcare professionals’ tasks are increased because some of the patients do equally respond to queries from the healthcare staff. Mentally retarded patients cannot easily explain how they feel or what they think to the healthcare providers. Consequently, the four countries of the United Kingdom are instrumental in establishing healthcare review centers. The learning disability training centers was initially started in Scotland. England was the second to establish the disability training centers. Wales was the third to set up the learning disability training facilities. Lastly, Northern Ireland followed close behind the setting up of its own disability learning centers (Barr, 2008). Further, the topics of the persons with learning disabilities training centers increase current healthcare knowledge of individuals assigned to care for the persons with learning disabilities. One of the topics is citizenship rights of the persons with learning disabilities. The second topic focuses on the patients’ rights to informed choice. The third topic is opportunities for improving the patients’ physical health status. The entire training refocuses the nurses’ and social workers’ strive to encourage the persons with learning disabilities to exert their rights as equal members of United Kingdom society (Barr, 2008). Furthermore, some healthcare facilities violated the United Kingdom choice policies (Mansell, 2008). In Cornwall, some families complained that the healthcare homes were not registered. Likewise, the healthcare workers gave low quality healthcare services. The patients were neglected. Other patients were abused. The Michael Report mentioned that the NHS services was instrumental in healthcare institutions introduce reasonable adjustments to fill the healthcare needs of the persons with learning disabilities. The vision of the United Kingdom government is to impose both equality and justice in the rehabilitiation of the persons with learning disabilities. Likewise, there are unfavourable outcomes to healthcare services allocated to the persons with learning disabilities. The unfavourable outcomes crop up if the proper adjustements are not included in the healthcare plans (Michael, 2008). The Michael Inquiry mentioned that adjustements that comply with the provisions of the Disability Discrmination Act should be set into motion to give the disabled individuals a better chance of levelling the playing field (clasroom environment) among all students. The Michael Inquiry showed that treating the persons with learning disabilities’ affliction will increase classroom learning and reduce deaths and unnecessary suffering among the student patients. The schools must focus on reducing avoidable morbidity and avoidable mortality among the persons with learning disabilities. Additionally, the community must do its part to support the intelligence-related needs of the persons with learning disabilities (Emerson, 1999). The United Kingdom Community Care Act and the 1990 NHS law indicates that the residential community must exert extra efforts to help the persons with learning disabilities have more of life. The baby boomers generation included a higher number of persons with learning disabilities. The baby boomers are those born between the 1960s and 1970s. Consequently, the community must focus its healthcare priorities to persons with learning disabilities. The persons include those who are young, middle aged, and elderly individuals. Further, some quarters are pursuing the removal of hindrances to giving better learning chances to persons with learning disabilities (Smith, 2012). One way of supporting persons with learning disabilities is to honor them. The festivities prop up the same persons with learning disabilities as normal contributors to the uplifting of societal comity. The festivities build bridges by making the community place importance on the persons with learning disabilities as normal partners in the United Kingdom communities’ economic, civil, political, and cultural progress. The festivities builds brigdges between the normal members of United Kingdom society and the persons with learning disabilities. In terms of reflective analysis, the above discussion clearly shows that persons with learning disabilities are often victims of social exclusion (Walraven, 2000). In real life, persons with learning disabilities are excluded in terms of employment, education and information. Social exclusion means that one person or group of persons are exclude from the a group. Normally, persons with learning disabilities are excluded from the group of normal individuals. When a group discussion ensues, the persons with learning disabilities are often left out of the discussion. Such persons cannot catch up with the learning levels of the normal students. For example, the class disscusion centers on mathematical computation, the persons with learning disabilities cannot compute for the mathematical results because their mind are too slow to analyse the numbers. Consequently, the persons with learning disabilities feel outcasts from the mathematics group. For example, the persons with learning disabilities are pictured as individuals who may bring down the group. For example, in a mathematics contest, the persons with learning disabilities will normally give wrong answers. Giving wrong anwers will contribute to the group’s losing the mathematics contest. Consequently, the group members do not want the persons with learning disabilities to join their group (Walraven, 2000). On the other hand, social inclusion includes resolving poverty, low income, unemployment, and being housebound and left aloner due to the menta incapacity. The persons having normal learning abilities are part of the social inclusion societal activities. Social includsion means that one person or group of persons are allowed to be included in the group or community. As described above, the bright students prefer to convene with people who have similar intellectual prowess. The bright students are included in the group because they can contribute their intelligent comments, answers, and opinions to the group. The intelligent student is often the leader of the group. Students prefer bright students in group reports or group activities (Walraven, 2000). 3. Reflective Critical questioning the evidence base of persons with learning disabilities In terms of reflective analysis, the new thrust of healthcare is correctly provides personalization-based care for patients, especially those classified as persons with learning disabilities (Simon, 2012). Personalization equates to innovation. Each patient correctly has different wants, needs, and even caprices. Consequently, the healthcare professional must base their nursing care procedures on the current status of the patients. The old-fashioned or traditional way of giving the same healthcare level and type to all patients correctly has been outmoded by the increased demands of the patients, especially the persons with learning disabilities, to exercise their self-determination rights. Consequently, Simon rightfully mentioned that the nurses must ask permission from the patients before implementing a preferred nursing care procedure (Simon, 2012). The patient rightfully has the right to refuse any treatment that he or she feels is uncomfortable or otherwise. The healthcare professional must explain to the persons with learning disabilities and the families of the patients the effects of such medical procedures. In turn, the persons with learning disabilities and their families can waive their right to stop the current invasive medical procedure. The patients are rightfully to be treated with care, not as guinea pigs. As guinea pigs, the medical doctors can wrongfully force the patient to take a certain medicine or undergo a compulsory medical procedure (Simon, 2012). The persons with learning disabilities can rightfully exercise their self-determination human right to refuse surgery by the medical doctor or any medical professional. The patients have the right to know the effects of certain medical procedures, including a major surgery. The patients and their families have the right to know the benefits and side effects of certain medical procedures or medicines. Ivory correctly insisted that personalisation is best seen in the home care environment. The home-based patients live in a different home environment (2010). The Chinese patient lives in a home that is full of Chinese culture. A Mexican patient lives in a home where Mexican concepts abound. Likewise, an African American home-based patient prefers the nurse understands the African American culture. The nurse should try to understand the true intentions of the patients by comprehending the culture of the patient and the patient’s environment. Also, the United Kingdom government correctly reiterates the importance of personalization (Macaulay, 2008). Personalization includes requiring the healthcare profession to offer several choices to the persons with learning disabilities and their families. Consequently, the patients and their families are given a free hand on which healthcare procedure will be implemented. Historically, the medical doctors and the healthcare professionals force the patients to take medicines prescribed by the doctors. The practice has been replaced by the new patients’ choice or personalization medical practice. The United Kingdom Labour Government implemented the New Right agenda. The agenda is correctly grounded on a person’s freedom of choice. The Post Blair government emphasized that choice is a right of all United Kingdom residents, especially the persons with learning disabilities. In September 2007, the Blair government reiterated that the Labour party’s stand is to implement the concept of personalization. Macaulay (2008) correctly theorized that prsonalization encompasses many areas of United Kingdom life, including the healthcare environment. For example, the patients were rightfully allowed to choose which four hospitals will give them free non-emergency medical treatment during February of 2006. United Kingdom Secretary Patricia Hewitt ensured that the choice policy was persuasively explained and implemented. More importantly, Annette Lawson (Lawson, 2008) correctly insisted that the United Kingdom and other European nations admit that the person’s right to access and implement one’s rights is hampered by the group inequalities. One of such disadvantaged groups is the group composed of persons with learning disabilities. The low Intelligence Quotient prevents the patients from analysing and deciding on equal level and speed as person without any disability. Likewise, the persons with learning disabilities rightfully have the right to pursue the normal activities of United Kingdom life (Race, 1999). The persons with learning disabilities can enjoy the food being eaten by pesons not suffering from low mental intelligence. Likewise, the persons with learning disabilities have the right to treated similarly as other normal individuals. The same persons rightfully require the compulsory help of the community, in terms of professional healthcare support. The community and its government should contribute to ensuring the persons with learning disabilities will develop their full potentials as human beings. The community should not discriminate against the such persons. Further, Gerrard correctly proposes that virtual learning should be implemented in order to help the persons with learning disabilities access chosen technologies (2007). The United Kingdom Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 and the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act of 2001 tagged as illegal any act that prevents the persons with learning disabilities from getting the same education privileges as normal human beings. The two laws correctly prohibit discriminating against learning disabled students by wrongly branding them as less favourable students (Hockings, 2012). Furthermore, the Act rightfully includes those patients who are afflicted with diabetes, physical defects, sensory defects, and learning disabilities. The learning disabilities include those suffering from dyslexia and chronic fatigue symptoms. The Act rightfully requires that the United Kingdom universities and other schools allow the students with learning disabilities easy access to all parts of the schools’ sections, just like the other normal human beings. The Act correctly caters to both current students with learning disabilities enrolled in the schools as well as those who will be enrolling the United Kingdom schools in the future. Further, the Equality Act of 2010 rightfully protects the rights of the persons with learning disabilities from being abused (Hockings, 2012). Further, the students with learning disabilities wrongly feel that they have to exert extra efforts to get the same grade or score in the tests (Lawson, 2004). Other students with learning disabilities wrongly give up trying to be on equal scholastic stature as the other normal students. Best support rightfully comes from siblings, parents, relatives, classmates, teachers, and the entire community. The government machinery must not wrongly escape its contributory responsibility to ensure the female persons with learning disabilities be given better chances at school tasks. School tasks include passing assignments, passing quizzes, passing tests, and answering oral questions. 4. Reflective proposal in relation to policy to enhance or develop citizenship and personalization of persons with learning disabilities. In terms of reflective analysis, the United Kingdom learning disability policy is favourable to all parties concerned (Whitehead, 2008). In 2001, the Valuing People programme was established. The programme is made up of regional advisors of the Value People Support Team. Funds that were saved from the closing of older hospitals were placed into the coffers of the Valuing People programme. The funds were allocated to establish the Learning Disability Development Fund (LDDF). The thrust of the programme is helping resolve the African and Ethnic group of persons’ learning disabilities. The programme includes supporting family caregivers and including the support of individuals in the main housing and hiring activities. Further, personalisation firmly includes using all available expertise and capacities to fill the needs of the persons with learning disabilities (Brown, 2006). The healthcare professionals coordinate with the families of the persons with learning disabilities to alleviate the plight of the patients. Person-centred care includes having a stronger relationship between the healthcare professionals and the patients. The relationships include material factors. other relationship factors border on emotional and psychological relief of the patients, especially the persons with learning disabilities. Consequently, the successful implementation contributes to the patients’ successful finding a job, eating one’s preferred food choice, or join preferred recreation activities. Furthermore, the abnormal person is correctly described as one who does not havethe same capacities as the average individual. Consequently, students having an intelligence quotient of 70 and below is classified as persons with learning disabilities. There is a small percentage of individuals having an intelligence quotient of 70 or below. Further, learning disability can be equated to abnormal behavior. Normal behavior equates to average behaviour. The average behavior for learning indicates that the average student has an intelligence quotient that is higher than 70 (Gates, 2007). In addition, it is highly recommended that patients take part in the curative process. The healthcare professionals persuade the patients, especially the persons with learning disabilities, to comply with the medical advice of the medical doctors. The patients are encouraged to take the prescribed medicines at the scheduled time period. The patients are encouraged to undergo medical surgery in order to improve their currently failing health condition. The healthcare professionals are advised to consider the patients as co-producers of health (Coulter, 2011). Further the community stakeholders will benefit from the implementation of anti-discrimination laws, especially in terms of the persons with learning disabilities. The family members prefer that society do its share to alleviate the mental incapacity of their children. Society expects the community stakeholders to contribute their financial and emotional shares to the uplifting of the low morale or discouragement being felt by the persons with learning disabilities. The government must increase budgets for the medical and other support needs of patients. The family must give their best efforts to helping their child with learning disability overcome the obstacles of getting high school grades and accomplished assigned tasks with the shortest possible time. The non-government and government institutions must financially contribute to help the persons with learning disabilities get higher grades, find jobs, maintain rewarding relationships, and do what the persons with learning disabilities are determined to pursue such as college diploma, job, or eat preferred food choices (Carr 2010). Reflectively summarizing the above analytical discussion, persons with learning disabilities are often victims of school and other discriminatory acts. The discrimination of persons with learning disabilities is prohibited by United Kingdom law. The current stance on individuals with learning disabilities, especially students with learning disabilities, is for all school community, individuals and groups to help the persons with learning disabilities determine their own future and contribute to their share to improving community life. Evidently, United Kingdom laws and other statutes mandate that all individuals with learning disabilities should be supported in their determination to enjoy all the rights and responsibilities that offered to the normally intelligent members of United Kingdom society. References: Barr, O. 2008, Education for Staff in Learning Disability Services, Tizard Learnding Disability Review, 13 (1), 18-27. Bollard, M, 2009, Intellectual Disability and Social Inclusion, Elsevier: London. Brown, J. 2006, Person-Centred Approaches and Quality of Life, Tizard Learning and Quality of Life , 11 (3), 4-12. Coulter, A. 2011, Engaging Patients in Healthcare, McGraw-Hill: London. Dimopoulos, A, 2010, Issues in Human Rights Protection of Intellectual Disabled Persons, Ashgate: London. Duffy, S. 2012, Persons with Learning Disabilities, Personalisation, Tizard Learning Disablity Review , 17 (3), 111-123. Emerson, E. 1999, InterResidential Supports for People with Intellectual Disabilities: Questions and Challenges from United Kingdom, Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability , 24 (4), 309-319. Gates, B. 2007, Learning Disabilities Towards Inclusion, Elsevier Sciences: London. Gerrard, C. 2007, Virtual Learning Environments: Enhancing the Learning Experience for Students with Disabilities, Campus -Wide Information Systems , 24 (3), 199-206. Hockings, C. 2012, Making a Difference-inclusive and Teaching in Higher Education Through Open Education Resources, Distance Education , 33 (2), 237-252. Ivory, M. 2010, March 17, The People Business, The Guardian , p. 3. Johns. C. 2004, 2nd Ed. Becoming a Reflective Practitioner, Sage: London. Lawson, A. 2008, Equality and Access to Human Rights for People with Learning Disability and Mental Illness Needs, Advances in Mental Health and Learning Disabilities , 2 (2), 3-8. Lawson, A. 2004, Human Rights and the Failure of Policy to Deliver: Women with Learning Disabilities and Mental Helath Needs, Trizard Learning Disability Review , 9 (4), 4. Mansell, J. 2008, Learning Disability Policy and Practice in the United Kingdom, Tizard Learning Disability Review , 13 (3), 12-15. Macaulay, M. 2008, Hobson's Choice? Meaning, Manner and Merits of choice in Public Services, The international Journal of Public Sector Management , 21 (6), 674-686. Michael, J. 2008, Healthcare for All: The Independent Inquiry into Access to Healthcare for People with Learning Disabilities, Tizard Learning Disability Review , 28 (37), 28-37. Nolan, P. 1993, A History of Mental Health Nursing, Nelson thornes: London. Race, D. 1999, Hearts and Minds: Social Role Valorisation, U.K. Academia and Services for People with a Learning Disability, Disability & Society , 14 (4), 519. SCIE, 2010, Personalisation a Rough Guide, Retrieved September 4, 2010 from, Smith, J. 2012, December 1, National Day of Persons with Disabilities, Leader Post , p. G8. Taylor-Gooby, P. 2010, Reframing Social Citizenship, Oxford, Oxford University Press Thomas, N. 2002, Reconstructing Mental Health Law and Policy, Cambridge Press: London. Walraven, G. 2000, Combating Social Exclusion Through Education, London: Garant . White, T. 2010, A Guide to the NHS, Radcliffe Press: London. Whitehead, S. 2008, Learning Disability in the United Kingdom, Tizard Learning Disability Review , 13 (3), 4- 11. Read More