University of Suffolk Context of Health and Social Care Assignment Brief Course/Programme: Certificate of Higher Education in Health and Social Care [with Foundation Year] Level: 3 Module Title: Context of Health and Social Care Module Leader: Sandra Okwara Assignment titles: Case Study Analysis Assignment number: 2 Weighting: 60%) Date given out: Feb 2026 Submission date: 30th March 2026 Eligible for late submission (3 working days, with penalty)? Yes Method of submission: X Online only Online and paper copy Special instructions for submission (if any): Ensure the use of not less than 10 Academic references to support your essay. Date for results and feedback: TBC Employability skills assessed: Critical Thinking Analytical Skills Ethical Reasoning Problem-Solving Cultural Competence and Empathy Research and Information Literacy Skills All assignments must be submitted to Turnitin. Note: The Turnitin version is the primary submission and acts as a receipt for the student. Late submission of the electronic version of the assignment will result in a late penalty mark. Penalties for late submission: Up to 72 hours late, maximum mark of 40%. Over 72 hours late, Refer. Only the UoS Extenuating Circumstances Panel may grant an extension. Requests for extensions must be submitted 5 days BEFORE the submission deadline The grade awarded for this piece of work remains provisional until ratified by UOS Exam Board. Referencing: In the main body of your submission, you must give credit to authors on whose research your work is based. Append to your submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles, etc. that you have read or quoted in order to complete this assignment (e.g. for books: surname of author and initials, year of publication, title of book, edition, publisher: place of publication). Disclosure: Please include the following statement on the title page of the submitted assignment, followed by your name: I declare that this assignment is all my own work and that I have acknowledged all materials used from the published or unpublished works of other people. All references have been duly cited. Assessment criteria: see grading criteria Learning Outcomes tested (from module descriptor) Assessment Criteria Indicative weighting Essay LO3: Demonstrate a basic knowledge of the various different professional roles and their associated responsibilities within the health and social care sector. 30% LO4: Identify some ethical dilemmas encountered in health and social care practice. 30% LO5: Describe, to an appropriate level, the key foundational concepts underpinning the sector: health, well-being, illness, disability and social care. 30% Referencing, Communication and Academic Skills 10% TASK DESCRIPTION: ASSIGNMENT TASK 1 This assignment requires you to demonstrate your understanding of how health and social care professionals work together to support individuals with complex needs. Carefully read the following case study about Ms. Eleanor Vance, and complete the tasks outlined below. Remember to apply your knowledge of different professional roles, interprofessional collaboration, and ethical considerations in your analysis. Case Study Scenario: Sam, 66 years old In this case study, we explore the life of Sam, a 66-year-old retired teacher who identifies as non-binary and is a practicing Sikh. Sams health profile is complex, involving a long-term diagnosis of HIV, a spinal injury that requires the use of a wheelchair, and the recent onset of Early-Onset Alzheimers disease. These overlapping identities and health conditions create a complex case for health and social care professionals, particularly when navigating the tension between Sams personal choices and the professionals’ legal and ethical responsibilities. One significant area of conflict involves the Right to Risk versus the Duty of Care. Sam currently resides in a traditional cottage characterized by steep and hazardous steps that make independent movement nearly impossible. While the Social Worker and Occupational Therapist have strongly recommended a move to a modern, accessible bungalow to ensure Sams safety, Sam has firmly refused. They believe their late partners spirit remains within the home and assert their right to choose where they live, even if that environment poses a physical threat. This forces professionals to decide whether Sam has the legal right to remain in a dangerous setting or if their professional responsibility to prevent a fatal fall must take priority over Sams autonomy. The Equality Act 2010 further complicates the situation through a clear Conflict of Rights. Sams religious faith is a cornerstone of their identity, requiring specific assistance with bathing and the tying of their turban, or Dastaar. To maintain religious modesty, Sam has requested a male carer. However, the only available male carer at the agency has expressed that his own religious beliefs make him uncomfortable working with an individual who is non-binary and living with HIV. This creates a difficult management dilemma: the care manager must determine how to balance Sams right to culturally appropriate care with the employees right to a comfortable working environment, raising the difficult question of whose rights take precedence in a diverse society. Finally, the case highlights the struggle between Professional Responsibility and Confidentiality. As Sams Alzheimers progresses, they have begun to “wander” in their wheelchair toward a busy main road, prompting a local village volunteer to offer afternoon supervision. The community nurse is aware that Sam has HIV and suffers from open sores due to poor circulation, which could pose a minor health risk during physical assistance. The nurse must grapple with whether their primary responsibility is to inform the volunteer of these medical risks for safety reasons or to uphold Sams fundamental right to medical privacy and confidentiality. This scenario challenges students to consider how professionals must act when the duty to protect the public seems to clash with the duty to protect a patient’s sensitive personal data. 4 | Page Task: 1. Task 1: Analyse Sams Health and Social Care Needs Using the case study provided, conduct an analysis of Sams needs. You must categorize your findings into the following three areas: Physical Health Needs: Consider the management of their spinal injury, HIV status, and the physical symptoms of Alzheimers. Mental and Emotional Well-being: Discuss the impact of grief (losing their partner), the fear of being “outed” or judged, and the confusion caused by their cognitive decline. Social and Environmental Needs: Evaluate the suitability of their current cottage and the impact of the “broken” connection to their local community and “chosen family.” Task 2: The Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) Identify four key health and social care professionals who would be required to support Sam. For each professional, you must: Clearly state their job title. Describe their specific role and responsibilities in Sams care. Task 3: Discuss Challenges and Ethical Dilemmas Identify and discuss the potential challenges and ethical dilemmas that arise in Sams care, specifically focusing on the Equality Act 2010. Your discussion should include: The conflict between Sams Right to Risk (staying in the cottage) and the professionals Duty of Care (safety). The Conflict of Rights between Sams religious/gender needs and the staff members religious beliefs. The ethical struggle between Professional Responsibility (safety of the volunteer) and Confidentiality (Sams HIV status). Task 4: Propose Solutions Based on Best Practice Discuss how the challenges and ethical dilemmas identified in Task 3 could be resolved or managed. Your solutions should refer to: Person-Centred Care: How to respect Sams identity while keeping them safe. Anti-Discriminatory Practice: How the care agency can manage staff conflicts without compromising Sams rights. Reasonable Adjustments: What practical steps could be taken to allow Sam to remain independent for as long as possible. This assignment assesses LO3, LO4 and LO5. In order to meet the module learning outcomes and pass this assessment, In your analysis, you should: 5 | Page Apply your knowledge of the health and social care system, professional roles, and ethical principles to analyse the case study. Demonstrate critical thinking skills by identifying challenges, evaluating potential solutions, and considering ethical implications. Provide clear and well-supported arguments, using evidence from the case study and relevant sources. Structure your analysis logically and maintain a professional tone. Adhere to academic conventions, including proper referencing. 1500 Words FORMATTING AND LAYOUT Please note the following when completing your written assignment: 1. Writing: Written in English in an appropriate business/academic style 2. Focus: Focus only on the tasks set in the assignment. 3. Ensure a clear title, course, and name or ID number is on a cover sheet and a bibliography using Harvard referencing throughout is also provided. 4. Research: Research should use reliable and relevant sources of information e.g. academic books and journals that have been peer reviewed. The research should be extensive. 5. All referencing should be in Harvard style. 6 | Page Level 3 In accordance with the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications, at the end of Level 3 students will be expected to have demonstrated knowledge of the basic underlying concepts and principles of a subject, and an ability to evaluate and interpret these within the context of that area of study. Students should be able to construct logical arguments about the impact of the issue and justify their proposed solutions and where students are expected to assess the benefits and drawbacks of different solutions. This applies across all criteria, emphasizing the importance of clear, well-organized, and well-supported communication. The “Critical Thinking” criterion touches on broader skills like analysis, evaluation, and problem-solving, which are valuable in various employment contexts. Grading criteria Criteria Excellent (80-100) Very Good (70-79) Good (60-69) Satisfactory (50-59) Poor (40-49) Fail (0-39) LO3: Knowledge of professional roles and responsibilities 40 marks Demonstrates comprehensive knowledge of a range of professional roles, their responsibilities, and ethical considerations. Can analyse complex situations and professional dilemmas. Demonstrates a good understanding of various professional roles and their responsibilities within the system. Can explain professional boundaries and codes of conduct. 21-23 marks Describes the roles and responsibilities of different health and social care professionals with reasonable accuracy. Shows awareness of ethical considerations. 18-20 marks Demonstrates basic knowledge of some professional roles but may have limited understanding of their responsibilities or ethical considerations. 15-17 marks Shows limited knowledge of professional roles and struggles to explain their responsibilities. 12-14 marks Demonstrates very limited or inaccurate knowledge of professional roles and responsibilities. 0-11 marks Page 7 of 9 Assignment Mark (Assessment marks are subject to ratification at the Exam Board. These comments and marks are to give feedback on module work and are for guidance only until they are confirmed. ) 72 Hours Late Submission Penalties Level 3 In accordance with the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications, at the end of Level 3 students will be expected to have demonstrated knowledge of the basic underlying concepts and principles of a subject, and an ability to evaluate and interpret these within the context of that area of study. Students should be able to construct logical arguments about the impact of the issue and justify their proposed solutions and where students are expected to assess the benefits and drawbacks of different solutions. This applies across all criteria, emphasizing the importance of clear, well-organized, and well-supported communication. The “Critical Thinking” criterion touches on broader skills like analysis, evaluation, and problem-solving, which are valuable in various employment contexts. Grading criteria Criteria Excellent (80-100) Very Good (70-79) Good (60-69) Satisfactory (50-59) Poor (40-49) Fail (0-39) LO3: Knowledge of professional roles and responsibilities 40 marks Demonstrates comprehensive knowledge of a range of professional roles, their responsibilities, and ethical considerations. Can analyse complex situations and professional dilemmas. Demonstrates a good understanding of various professional roles and their responsibilities within the system. Can explain professional boundaries and codes of conduct. 21-23 marks Describes the roles and responsibilities of different health and social care professionals with reasonable accuracy. Shows awareness of ethical considerations. 18-20 marks Demonstrates basic knowledge of some professional roles but may have limited understanding of their responsibilities or ethical considerations. 15-17 marks Shows limited knowledge of professional roles and struggles to explain their responsibilities. 12-14 marks Demonstrates very limited or inaccurate knowledge of professional roles and responsibilities. 0-11 marks Page 7 of 9 Assignment Mark (Assessment marks are subject to ratification at the Exam Board. These comments and marks are to give feedback on module work and are for guidance only until they are confirmed. ) 72 Hours Late Submission Penalties 24-30 marks LO4: Identification and discussion of ethical dilemmas 30 marks Identifies and critically analyses a range of ethical dilemmas in health and social care. Can apply ethical principles to complex situations and propose well-reasoned solutions. 24-30 marks Identifies and discusses ethical dilemmas with clarity and insight. Shows an understanding of ethical principles and their application. 21-23 marks Identifies some ethical dilemmas and can discuss them in relation to basic ethical principles. 18-20 marks Identifies a few ethical dilemmas but may struggle to discuss them in depth or relate them to ethical principles. 15-17 marks Shows limited awareness of ethical dilemmas in health and social care. 12-14 marks Fails to identify or discuss ethical dilemmas. 0-11 marks LO5: Understanding of key concepts (health, well-being, illness, disability, social care) 30 Marks Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of key concepts and their interrelationships. Can apply these concepts to diverse contexts and perspectives. 24-30 marks Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of key concepts and can apply them to real-world examples. Shows awareness of diverse perspectives on health and well-being. 21-23 marks Defines and explains key concepts with clarity and accuracy. Can relate these concepts to different service user groups. 18-20 marks Demonstrates a basic understanding of key concepts but may have some gaps or inaccuracies in definitions. 15-17 marks Shows limited understanding of key concepts and struggles to apply them to real-world examples. 12-14 marks Demonstrates very limited or inaccurate understanding of key concepts. 0-11 marks Page 8 of 9 Overall Communication and Academic Skills 10 Marks Presents work in a highly organized and engaging manner with excellent academic writing skills. Uses sophisticated language and accurate referencing. 8-10 marks Communicates effectively in a clear and well-structured manner. Uses appropriate academic language and referencing. 7 marks Presents work in a generally clear and organized manner. May have some minor errors in language or referencing. 6 marks Communicates adequately but may have some inconsistencies in clarity or organization. Referencing may be incomplete or inaccurate. 5 marks Presents work that is poorly organized or difficult to understand. Significant errors in language or referencing. 4 marks Presents work that is very poorly organized, unclear, and/or with significant errors in language and referencing. 0-3 marks Page 9 of 9 I’ve also sent you the link it explain better what i have to do for my essay.
Attached Files (PDF/DOCX): CONTEXT OF HEALTH ASSIGNMENT 2 BRIEF January 26 (2) (2).docx
Note: Content extraction from these files is restricted, please review them manually.