An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor s record of treating similarly afflicted patients Through gaining such access the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition Write a re

Essay topics:

An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor’s record of treating similarly afflicted patients. Through gaining such access, the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.

It is the right of the patient to get a proper diagnosis and treatment for the illness he is going through. So, the patient should be able to analyze the competency of the doctor before taking treatment from doctor. In my opinion, I agree with prompt for two reasons.

Trusting the doctor is very important before getting treatment. The patient should have some level of credence on the skill of doctor, so that the patient is mentally prepared for the treatment. If, the patient is mentally unprepared, the treatment may not work on him. For instance, a patient is suffering from nearsightedness and he wants to undergo a surgery to correct his vision. The patient in this case should have some faithfulness in doctor that, the doctor will not damage his eyes altogether, instead he will correct the vision as required. If, the patient is terrified throughout the operation, his fear can results in some undesirable results. So, in this scenario, if the patient can see the previous vision correction operations that the doctor has performed and the success rates in those operations helps the patient to get faith in the doctor. This example clearly indicates why patient should have rights to see doctor's records.

The patient should have a chance to check the genuineness of the doctor. There are many examples in which people getting treatment from fake doctors and loosing their money and worsening their health conditions. Some fake doctors may lure patients with their brilliant marketing tricks such as less money and counterfeit surgeries they performed on imaginary patients over the time. So, it should be easy for a patient to get records of doctor's earlier treatment records. For instance, there is a fake doctor in a big city whose main targets are patients fro nearby underdeveloped areas. This clearly shows the importance of records should be accessible

However, some people may argue that, the accession of previous treatment records is a violation of privacy rights of other patients. It is the duty of the doctor to keep the treatment records confidential. But it is not true, it is possible for the doctors to provide earlier treatment records in a limited manner so that the privacy is not violated. Hence, it is very much necessary for a patient to know about the earlier treatments given by the doctor he is visiting.

Votes
Average: 5.4 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 556, Rule ID: FOR_FRO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'for'?
Suggestion: for
...ig city whose main targets are patients fro nearby underdeveloped areas. This clear...
^^^
Line 7, column 295, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a limited manner" with adverb for "limited"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...rs to provide earlier treatment records in a limited manner so that the privacy is not violated. He...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, however, if, may, so, for instance, such as, in my opinion

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 58.6224719101 80% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1961.0 2235.4752809 88% => OK
No of words: 394.0 442.535393258 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97715736041 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6912423114 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 215.323595506 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.454314720812 0.4932671777 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 586.8 704.065955056 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.7686801293 60.3974514979 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.05 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.21951772744 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.337300003532 0.243740707755 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.132281890545 0.0831039109588 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0663904724812 0.0758088955206 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.22748722689 0.150359130593 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0613687595406 0.0667264976115 92% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.1392134831 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.1639044944 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.58 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 100.480337079 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:

para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.


Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.