Key Ethical Considerations in the Health Advocacy Campaign

Part one outlined the extent of child obesity in the United States. The effect of obesity is that it has strained the American healthcare system by increasing the prevalence of various deceases that are associated with obesity. Child obesity is a prevalent and major health concern among the American parents. Several campaigns have been carried out in America with the aim of reducing the prevalence of the disease in the American Community (O'Malley et al., 2014). Some of them include “Action for Healthy Kids Weight Loss Campaign” and the “LET’S MOVE Healthy weight campaign.” Both campaigns targeted the reduction of childhood obesity and aimed at providing avenues through which children can be prevented from becoming obese. In the first part, I outlined my advocacy campaign that equally aims at contributing to the fight against obesity. This advocacy campaign focused on child diet. It outlined a healthy deity for babies from the time they begin eating. The rationale behind this campaign was to develop a taste for healthy foods among young children from a young age and hence control their affinity for unhealthy foods as they grow.
The Implementation of this advocacy campaign required an environment of legislative and policy goodwill. The second part discussed several existing laws aimed at curbing the spread of obesity in the American society. These include the Farm Bill of 2008 and the Transportation Bill. The section discussed the shortcomings of these laws that limit their effectiveness in dealing with the problem of obesity (Phillips, Ryan, & Raczynski, 2011). Most fundamentally, the success of raise a healthy child campaign will largely depend on its compliance with the ethical consideration of the American population (O'Malley et al., 2014). Therefore, it is imperative to put into account several ethical considerations in the implementation of this campaign to match to the ethical requirements of the society.
Several ethical dilemmas could be encountered during the implementation of this campaign and the program itself. First, the American Nurses Association outlines the need for respecting the rights of patients in the course of the profession. In this case, it is right for envy public health practitioner to respect the choices and the personal rights of the people they are serving. One of the fundamental rights of people is to be able to choose the foods they eat and the time that they eat it. Therefore, dictating a person’s meals is violating their fundamental right to choose (Minihan, Must, Andrewson & Popper, 2011). The campaign advocates for the setting up a menu for parents to use in the feeding of their children. The ethical dilemma in the implementation of this advocacy campaign relates to how to navigate the right to choose and still ensure that parents and children stick to the prescribed meals and feeding pattern.
Therefore, the success of this advocacy campaign will depend on its ability to preserve the right to choose among the people while ensuring the children remain loyal to the feeding menu outlined in this advocacy campaign (Crawford, Gosliner & Kayman, 2011). With the desire to overcome this dilemma, the camping will strategize on effective ways of ensuring compliance without compelling. The parents will not be compelled to undertake the menu prescribed under this advocacy campaign, but the campaign will enable them to choose it voluntarily (Minihan, Must, Andrewson & Popper, 2011). The healthcare practitioner will explain the basic advantages of the foodstuffs outlined in this menu. However, the decision on whether or not to adopt it will remain with the parents. The parents will either have the opportunity to consent or reject the proposal (Long, Henderson & Schwartz, 2013). This way, the freedom to choose will still be respected will people are given an opportunity to use healthy foods.
The second ethical dilemma lies in Provision 7 of the ethical code of conduct in healthcare provision as outlined by the American Nurses Association. Among other things, this ethical provision requires the health practitioner to collaborate with both other practitioners as well as the community in delivering healthcare services. In the case of this campaign, this ethical requirement in the healthcare practice will provide an ethical dilemma considering the diversity of the community (Minihan, Must, Andrewson & Popper, 2011). For instance, the same community has farmers who produce the very foodstuff that this campaign seeks to prohibit or limit its use. Secondly, the society equally comprises of companies that process meat products as well as other foodstuffs that the campaign seeks to discourage (Long, Henderson & Schwartz, 2013). Many families work in this company, and the indirect implication of this advocacy campaign is that they are likely to lose their jobs. In this case, the ethical dilemma relates to the need to involve the entire community in the implementation of this advocacy even when it advocacy affects the economic status of a section of the community.
While seeking to resolve this issue, the campaign will take some fundamental precaution. First, this advocacy campaign will focus on educating people on how the health merits of the campaign far outweigh its economic implication in the end (Crawford, Gosliner & Kayman, 2011). This will ensure that the people understand the action being undertaken and are in full support for this advocacy. Secondly, the advocacy campaign will seek to lobby the government to seek alternative ways through which such food products can be utilized rather than being used for human consumption. This will ensure that the demand for such meat products alongside other food products that this program limits finds alternative use and hence maintains its current demand (Long, Henderson & Schwartz, 2013). Consequently, the community members will not necessarily lose their source of livelihood by the implementation of this advocacy campaign.
Similarly, Provision 7 of the ethical code of conducts in the provision of healthcare as outlined by the American Nurses Association requires the nurses to contribute positively in building the existing body of knowledge about the healthcare (O'Malley et al., 2014). This campaign equally seeks to contribute in building the existing body of knowledge about the health effects of obesity. The challenge in building this body of knowledge concerning the healthy eating advocacy campaign lies in drawing the line between public health and the individual freedom to eat what they want and to grow as they wish. In most cases, people often have their tastes and preferences in the foods they choose to eat. Moreover, some people may deliberately desire to add weight significantly (Long, Henderson & Schwartz, 2013). Therefore, the ethical dilemma in the implementation of this advocacy campaign relates to the accommodation of these varying individual interests within the framework of its implementation and contribution to the existing body of knowledge.
Given this ethical dilemma and building this knowledge, this advocacy campaign will take several deliberate efforts to navigate it. First, the advocacy campaign will focus on the enthusiastic population (Minihan, Must, Andrewson & Popper, 2011). Whereas people have their personal preferences regarding the foods they eat and that some people have preferences for the foods that this advocacy campaign seeks to limit, several people are genuinely yearning to receive the dietary help that will ensure their children and themselves maintain a healthy body weight (Crawford, Gosliner & Kayman, 2011). The campaign will respect the individual’s tests and presences and hence contribute to building a body of knowledge in a way that only informs the public about the importance of healthy eating rather than compelling them to take up eating habits that they have no personal preferences. The advocacy will not compel them to take up eating habits that counter their preferences. By taking an educational approach, this advocacy campaign will navigate the ethical dilemma identified above.
Several ethics and lobbying laws apply to the advocacy campaign outlined in this paper. First, the major ethical law that greatly affects this advocacy campaign is the ethical law regarding the extent of state intervention on individual autonomy. Under this law, the individual autonomy must largely be taken into consideration when the state intervenes in matters that affect individuals (Phillip Ryan & Raczynski, 2011). In the case of this campaign, eating habits is an individual choice and a pertinent factor of their autonomy. The question of concern is the extent to which state or any other lobbying group should interfere with this fundamental factor of individual autonomy regardless of whether it is in the best interest of the community or the individual in question.
This ethical law can be considered through two frameworks. The first is the libertarian approach. This approach highly upholds individual autonomy. Under libertarianism, the state must not interfere with the individual autonomy that guarantees them to choose the type of food that they wish to consume (Crawford, Gosliner & Kayman, 2011). Therefore the individual could be informed of healthy eating practices but cannot be compelled by either the state or any other lobbying group to take up eating habits that are not inter best interests. The second method adopts a utilitarian approach. In such a case, the state can compel an individual to take up specific habits if such habits are in the best interest of their health and the community health at large (O'Malley et al., 2014). The utilitarian approach upholds the interest of the state above any individual right to choose. Moreover, it considers the specific responsibility that the state has in protecting the lives of its citizens. In the case of this advocacy campaign, the state has a responsibility to ensure that parents do not harm the lives of their children by exposing them to unhealthy foods (Minihan, Must, Andrewson & Popper, 2011). Therefore, the legislative and policy lobbying outlined in this advocacy campaign will be in line with the state’s responsibility in the strict sense of the Utilitarian approach.
Under the stewardship model, the state intervention, as well as the intervention of any other lobbying group, must be confined in reducing the susceptibility of the general population towards obesity (Crawford, Gosliner & Kayman, 2011). Secondly, such intervention must aim at eliminating or reducing the causes of child obesity by creating an environment that supports healthy eating, as well as legislative and policy, mean that guarantees such good eating habits. Thirdly, the lobbying group or the state must emphasize to the public the risks of the vulnerable groups such as children about childhood obesity (O'Malley et al., 2014). Moreover, the state or any lobbying group must demonstrate an intention to promote programs and activities that help the general population to maintain a healthy eating habit. Lastly, the state and the lobbying groups ought to take deliberate efforts in ensuring that the general population is encouraged to maintain a healthy lifestyle.
Several lobbying laws will equally affect the implementation of this advocacy campaign. However, the lobbying laws vary from one state to another. First, the law in all states agrees about the basic definition of a lobbyist. The law defines a lobbyist as a person who deliberately seeks to influence government decision, legislation of policy formulation in a certain matter. Moreover, the 1995 lobbying disclosure necessitates any lobbying group to disclose to both the government as well as the public about the intention of its lobbying activities as well as the funding and expenditure (Phillips, Ryan, & Raczynski, 2011). This law envisions an environment in which lobbying groups are only allowed to operate if their intentions are genuine and in the interest of the public. Therefore, the law advocates for transparency in the running of the affairs of any lobbying group. Furthermore, this transparency seeks to avail information to the government, general public and rival lobbying groups about the activities of any given lobbying group (Long, Henderson & Schwartz, 2013).
The campaign finance reforms outline the extent to which lobbying groups should be involved in the politics of the country. For a long time, lobbyists have sought to finance key political leaders who are aligned with their concept to influence the legislative as well as policy formulation in deferent levels of governance. The effect of this is that the political leaders elected often do not maintain objectivity in legislation policy formulation since they feel obliged to support the interest of the lobbying groups that funded their campaigns (Phillips, Ryan, & Raczynski, 2011). Consequently, the campaign finance reforms eliminated the financial input of lobbying groups in political campaigns with the aim of maintaining objectivity among the elected leaders after their elections.
Several ethical challenges are unique to the American children and parents concerning their efforts in dealing with the problem of obesity. First, the major ethical challenge is child neglect (Blacksher, 2009). This occurs where a parent neglects his or her principal role in taking care of their children. It is the responsibility of parents to ensure that their children are safe and secure. However, most American families have delegated such responsibilities to their workers within the families. As a result, parents are out of touch with the reality of the diets that their children eat. This ethic challenge threatens the success of any efforts aimed at reforming ensuring that children are exposed to healthy foods (Long, Henderson & Schwartz, 2013). The involving of parents in the diet of their children is the fundamental pillar that will ensure the success of the program outlined in this paper.
The second ethical challenge in the implementation of this advocacy campaign is the possibility of intruding into their privacy (Blacksher, 2009). This ethical campaign requires the health practitioner to follow up consistently to ensure that families are feeding their children on the appropriate and right quantities of foodstuffs as outlined in their menu. However, most American families uphold the importance of their privacy. The choice of a lifestyle and the meals people eat is a critical component of individual privacy, and hence the American population is keen on protecting such privacy (Minihan, Must, Andrewson & Popper, 2011). Therefore, the health practitioners administering this advocacy campaign may face resistance from this population due to the perceived violation of their ethical right to privacy.
Thirdly, the confidentiality of people is another ethical challenge that will face the implementation of this advocacy campaign outlined in this paper. Most American families want to ensure the confidentiality of their families. Therefore, they may not express the specific challenges that they are going through during the implementation of this advocacy campaign. The success and sustainability of this advocacy campaign will largely depend on the continuous improvement and monitoring (Phillips, Ryan, & Raczynski, 2011). The continuous improvement will largely depend on the feedback of its implementation from the public. However, the ethical consideration of confidentiality will impair the ability to obtain feedback and hence continuously improve the program (Blacksher, 2009). The net effect of this that the advocacy campaign may not be sustainable in the end because of the lack of commitment to feedback owing to its perceived violation of the ethical principles of confidentiality.
Summary
The first part of this advocacy campaign outlined the fundamental threat that American children to obesity. It further explained the various advocacy campaigns that have been put in place to address the problem of childhood obesity among the American children. Finally, it outlined an intended advocacy campaign that will equally contribute to dealing with the problem of child obesity. The second part outlined the legal limitations of the implementation of this advocacy campaign in light of the existing legislative and policy framework. It further outlined a lobbying initiative that aims at changing laws that favor the environment in which this advocacy campaign can thrive. However, there are several ethical dilemmas in the implementation of this advocacy campaign. The provisions 7, 8 and 9 of the ethical code of conduct as outlined in the American Nurses Association challenges the implementation requirements of this advocacy campaign in several ways. This creates various ethical challenges as addressed in this paper. Therefore, the success of the implementation of this advocacy campaign will depend on the ability to navigate such ethical dilemma. Moreover, the ethical and lobbying laws in existence with different states in America will ultimately influence the success of this advocacy campaign and determine its success. Finally, the implementation of this advocacy campaign will face several ethical challenges that are unique to the American population and must be executed in a way that overcomes such challenges.


References
Blacksher, E. (2009). Children's health inequalities: ethical and political challenges to seeking social justice. Hastings Cent Rep; 38(4):28–35.
Crawford, P.B., Gosliner, W., & Kayman, H. (2011). The ethical basis for promoting nutritional health in public schools in the United States. Prev Chronic Dis. 8(5): A98.
Long, M.W., Henderson, K.E., & Schwartz, M.B. (2013). Evaluating the impact of a Connecticut program to reduce the availability of unhealthy competitive food in schools. Journal of School Health, 80(10), 478–486.
Minihan, P, Must A, Andrewson B, & Popper, B.(2011). Children with special health care need: acknowledging the dilemma of difference in policy responses to obesity. Preventing Chronic Disease, 8(5)95-102
O'Malley. P.M, Johnston, L.D, Delva, J., Bachman, J.G., & Schulenberg. J.E. (2014) Variation in obesity among American secondary school students by school and school characteristics. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 33:187–194.
Phillips, M.M., Ryan. K, & Raczynski, J.M. (2011). Public policy versus individual rights in childhood obesity interventions: perspectives from the Arkansas experience with Act 1220 of 2003. Preventing Chronic Disease 8(5): A96.