Community Pharmacy Services in Mimika, Indonesia

Community pharmacies play a crucial role in providing healthcare services, especially in regions like Mimika, Indonesia, where access to healthcare facilities may be limited. These pharmacies serve as accessible points of care, offering a range of essential services and products to local residents. Here’s an exploration of the community pharmacy services available in Mimika:

 

1. Accessible Medications:

Pafikabmimika, ensure the availability of essential medications, catering to the immediate healthcare needs of the community. This accessibility is vital, considering the challenges in reaching larger healthcare facilities.

 

2. Health Education and Counseling:

Pharmacists in these community settings often provide valuable health education and counseling. They inform patients about medication usage, potential side effects, and proper health practices, empowering them to manage their health more effectively.

 

3. Chronic Disease Management:

Many residents in Mimika suffer from chronic diseases such as diabetes and hypertension. Community pharmacies offer services like blood pressure monitoring, blood sugar testing, and medication adherence counseling to support these patients in managing their conditions.

 

4. Immunizations and Preventive Care:

Vaccinations and immunizations are crucial for preventing infectious diseases. Community pharmacies in Mimika often collaborate with health authorities to provide immunization services, ensuring that residents, especially children and the elderly, receive necessary vaccinations.

 

5. Over-the-Counter (OTC) Products:

Beyond prescription medications, community pharmacies stock a variety of over-the-counter products like vitamins, first aid supplies, and personal care items. This availability is essential in meeting the daily health and wellness needs of the community.

 

6. Patient Convenience:

Community pharmacies in Mimika prioritize convenience for patients by offering extended hours, quick service, and sometimes home delivery of medications. These efforts are particularly beneficial for elderly patients or those with mobility issues.

 

7. Collaboration with Healthcare Providers:

Pharmacists in community pharmacies often collaborate closely with physicians and other healthcare providers. This collaboration ensures coordinated care and effective management of patient health, especially in cases requiring multiple medications or complex treatment plans.

 

8. Emergency Care Support:

During emergencies or natural disasters, community pharmacies in Mimika serve as critical points for immediate healthcare needs. They often stock emergency medications and supplies, providing essential support to the community during challenging times.

 

9. Health Screening Services:

Some community pharmacies in Mimika offer health screening services such as cholesterol testing, BMI (Body Mass Index) measurements, and basic health assessments. These screenings help identify health risks early and encourage proactive healthcare management.

 

10. Community Engagement and Support:

Beyond their role in healthcare provision, community pharmacies actively engage with the local community through health awareness campaigns, support groups, and partnerships with local organizations. This involvement fosters a stronger community approach to health and well-being.

 

In conclusion, Pafikabmimika play a vital role in ensuring access to essential healthcare services for local residents. From providing medications and health education to offering preventive care and emergency support, these pharmacies are integral to the community’s health infrastructure. Their continuous efforts contribute significantly to improving health outcomes and quality of life in Mimika.

Negative ethics behavior

JP Morgan Chase & Co. is one the largest global bank. It is the largest American bank in terms of assets and the second largest bank globally. The large size of the company can be attributed to the 2000 merger with Chase Manhattan Corporation. The merger raised JPMorgan Chase asset base to $2.5 trillion making the company the second-largest bank globally (Forbes, 2012). JPMorgan offers a wide array of services from credit card services for private banking and asset management. Its major competitors include the Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Citigroup. Over the four years, JPMorgan has paid $16 billion in terms of fines, settlements, and other litigation expenses. More than half of the amount has been paid in fines and settlement due to illegal actions taken by the company’s executives. JP Morgan Chase & Co. is built on the foundation of over 1,000 predecessor institutions that have emerged over years. Some of the heritage banks include Chase Manhattan, Bank One, and the Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co.

JP Morgan code of ethics
JPMorgan has an elaborate code of conduct for its employees. According to the code of conducts, the code of conduct establishes the expectations that the company has for all employees. It also provides the information and resources essential to conduct the business ethically. It helps ensure that employees take actions that preserve the future legacy of the firm. The company has a decision tree that helps employees make a decision. The decision tree helps decide the legality of the action and whether the action complies with company’s codes and principles.

The aim of the code of ethics is to promote honest and ethical conduct and compliance with the law, especially as related to the maintenance of a financial report. The codes of ethics help employees to engage in and promote ethical conduct including the ethical handling of conflict of interest. It enables employees conduct their responsibilities honestly and with integrity. Employees use the code to produce full, fair, accurate and understandable disclosure in reports and financial reports. Additionally, the code of ethics complies with applicable government laws, rules and regulations.

JP Morgan works in a highly regulated industry. As such, being aware of and complying with law and regulations is critical to its business processes. The company is cognizant that the violation of law or engaging in deceptive practices may weaken customer confidence and the reputation of the firm. Trust is essential to JP Morgan business success. Customers, suppliers and vendors who do business with the company value the confidentiality of their information.

Ethical cases
In a settlement that occurred in 2005, JP Morgan agreed to pay Enron and Enron shareholders over $2 billion dollars for the company’s involvement in the implosion of Eron. A year later, the company was involved in another multibillion-dollar settlement with WorldCom. In years prior to this, JPMorgan was involved with seven other prepay arrangements. These are some of the major ethical infractions that hurt JPMorgan financial performance and reputation.

In 2009, JP Morgan paid $700 million to end a probe into the bank’s bribing of government officials in Jefferson County, Alabama; the probe was initiated after Jefferson County, Alabama’s most populous county, was forced to look into bankruptcy proceeding to salvage its finances. Complex derivatives trading was also implicated in the scandal. Under the deal to settle the bankruptcy of Jefferson County, firms that invested in its distressed debt gained while JP Morgan faced immense loss.

In 2009, JP Morgan engaged in a historical dishonest, deceptive and outrageous assessment and collection of overdraft fees. Consequently, thousands of customers sued the bank for fraudulent practices. The scandal began after customers began noticing that their credit card debts were being submitted to the collector monthly on their behalf by JP Morgan were not in inflated. JPMorgan achieved these by creating false overdraft charges to the accounts of these customers giving them an impression that they owed more money than they did. Consequently, a JPMorgan subsidiary was able to make revenue of over $ 1 billion from the false overdraft fees in 2009. According to the Friedman’s economic theory of individualism, the sole goal of a business is to make a profit. As such, the main obligation of a business is to maximize profit for the stockholders. According to this theory, JPMorgan acted consistently with this theory because its employees cared only for maximizing profits for the company regardless of impacts of the actions to other stakeholders. According to the utilitarian theory, happiness or pleasure are the key things of intrinsic value. As such, JPMorgan did not act according to these values when it committed the acts of financial theft for their selfish interest. Additionally, JPMorgan violated the Kantianism theory of ethics. The Kantianism theory holds that one must act rationally and consistently to his or her actions. It postulates that one must not consider herself or he exempt from rules, one most allow and help people make rational decisions, respect people and respect their autonomy. Additionally, the Kantianism theory holds that one must be motivated by good will and always seek to do what is right. JPMorgan’s act does not comply with any of these Kantianism postulates. The bank lied to its employees, fabricating stories and commanding the employees to take orders without questions. The fourth theory is the virtues theory that postulates that individuals should act with “good virtues” or best characteristics. Such virtues include honesty, temperance, fairness, and courage. As such, it is unfair and dishonest for the company to falsify customer charges. JP Morgan acts do not exemplify temperance, and the executives did not pay attention to regulations. By practically gambling on long-shot bets using clients’ money, lksil was not acting to reflect justice for all stakeholders.

In 2012, one of its key traders, Bruno Lksil was reported for have been practicing assertive and risky trading for a long time. Traders in one of JP Morgan had even made bets against Lksil, who later came to be known as the “London Whale.” The report began with the emergence on April (2012) about the magnitude of a loss. According to initial estimates, showed that customers had lost approximately $ 2 billion. Further investigation indicated loss due to the scandalize dealing amounted to $ 7 billion. It is essential to understand JP Morgan key stakeholders. In this case, the stakeholders include the executive officers of the bank including Lksil, employees, JP Morgan competitors, and account holders. The aim of the executives is to maximize bank’s profit for stockholders’ sake. During the pre-crisis period, the bank had sustained revenue. As such, the executives felt obliged to continue with the high performance. The need to retain the high performance forced some executives including Lsksil to make ill-advised investment decisions. Employees not in the managed position had a key interest in working in an environment that offers job security. The employees focus on rewarding duties while providing the comfort of knowing they have steady. As the scandal unfolded, employees were uncertain of their future. In fact, the company offsets off 19,000 employees. The most affected stakeholders are the investors. The objective of investors was to find safe and protected savings to their investments. The scandal affected interest rates, investments, and return on investment. From an individualistic view of business ethics, JP would have acted ethically if the trading tactic were successful. The normative ethics theory does not focus on the public and its happiness or good will. Instead, the individualistic perspective views decision-making as based on maximizing benefits for the firm and its stakeholders. If Lksil had succeeded, the risky actions would have benefited all the stakeholders thus not violating the individualistic perspective of ethics. The company failed to maximize profit and lost billions. According to the utilitarian theory, actions should maximize utility. The utility aims at extreme happiness and low levels of suffering. As such, business decisions should ensure happiness for the public and the company. However, the risky trading did not yield the expected result but led to heavy losses leaving both the company and investors unhappy. Additionally, the scandal left very many people discontented. On the contrary, if the deals had succeeded, the company would have acted ethically. According to the Kantianism, formulates four principles that include acting consistently and rationally, assisting others to make rational choices and respecting the needs of others. The last principle “acting in good will” implies that “the end does not justify the means.” As such, doing good does not mean doing what is convenient or easier. Customers who trust a bank to handle their money should be treated honestly. As such, the company needs to admit mistakes. Concealing information or truth from these customers is inexcusable from an ethical viewpoint. Overall, JP’s response to the plan was relatively successful, and the bank was able to regain support and trust of its shareholders.

JP Morgan’s act violated all the four Kant’s principles. The London Whale was not acting rationally. Additionally, the company did not respect the needs of others but chose to focus on the needs of a few traders. There is no evidence that JP Morgan was acting in good will. The scandal also violated the virtue theory of ethics. The four main principles of the theory include courage, honesty, justice, and temperance. Although it took courage to make the risky trades, the collapse of the deal violates the other three principles. The employees ignore honesty and commit deals without informing investors. The company is accused of being complicit to assisting and abetting the Madoff Ponzi scheme by ignoring signs of potential fraud. However, Morgan’s lawyer noted that the company did not have an active partner in the scheme to be found guilty of a civil liability. The company’s omission made the company ignore some red flags, and a failed to invest the accuracy of some of the information. It failed to investigate Madoff effectively and could be found to be the complaint in the scam. In 2011, JP Morgan lost $2 billion as a result of unauthorized trading with derivative swaps. The practice begets the 2008 financial crisis. While the magnitude of the loss is staggering, some perspective is essential. JP Morgan Chase’s initially dismissed the losses as a “tempest in a teapot.” However, he later acknowledged the magnitude of the loss.

In 2008, JP Morgan was among the banks complicit in the practices that led to the 2008 global financial crisis. JP Morgan is currently the largest U.S. holder of credit default swap and derivative assets. Morgan lost approximately $ 9 billion on credit default (28% of net equity) and was forced to sell $ 5 billion stake to the state-controlled China Investment Corporation.

Currently, JP Morgan receives approximately 77% of its annual income from the U.S. government through implicit subsidization. The U.S. government support of the bank in the event of its financial collapse “Too Big Too Fail” ensure the bank sees a high degree of faith in its stability as an investment vehicle. The company has already received financial benefits worth $ 14 billion annually through borrowing rates, and increased investor investment. The government support is what allows the bank to ignore a permanent loss of “credit” as spoken by JP Morgan.

On 19th November (2013), JP agreed to pay $ 13 billion settlement with the federal government over selling faulty mortgage investments. The company admitted selling toxic securities that helped lead to the housing crisis and the worst financial crisis. The payment market of the settlement is the largest made by a single company in the American history. The payment ends a period during which the Justice Department has pursued Morgan for a prolonged period. However, Morgan has contended the government’s case from investment bank Bear Stearns and the institution Washington Mutual. Morgan had purchased the crippled institutions at the depth of the financial crisis The amount of campaign contributions received by senators on the Senate Banking Committee correlates directly to the amount of power they hold on the committee. JP Morgan and its subsidiaries have a long history of questionable practices directed at the U.S government.

In recent years, J Morgan has come under hot criticism about its hiring practices in China. It is acceptable. Evident that the company has a profound track record of unethical and illegal practices. It is essential to note that these standard practices may have direct ethical benefits such charity donations. However, these benefits do not “off-set” unethical practices in a way that would be ethically acceptable. JP Morgan also stands as a leader of the controversy among industry contemporaries.

Conclusion
The JP Morgan case reinforces that JP Morgan is an example of violations that have a deep organization cause. JP Morgan Chase & Co. is one the largest global bank. It is the largest American bank in terms of assets and the second largest bank globally. Although the company has a strong code of ethics, it has a history of violation of the attacks. JPMorgan has an elaborate code of conduct for its employees. According to the code of conducts, the code of conduct establishes the expectations that the company has for all employees. It also provides the information and resources essential to conduct the business ethically. It helps ensure that actions employees take preserve the future legacy of the firm. However, it has had a several violation of ethical practices. The cases began as early as 2001. In 2005, JP Morgan agreed to pay Enron and Enron shareholders over $2 billion dollars for the company’s involvement in the implosion of Eron. In 2009, JP Morgan paid $700 million to end a probe into the bank’s bribing of government officials in Jefferson County, Alabama; the probe was initiated after Jefferson County, Alabama’s most populous county, was forced to look into bankruptcy proceeding to salvage its finances. In 2011, JP Morgan lost $2 billion as a result of unauthorized trading with derivative swaps. The practice begets the 2008 financial crisis. In 2012, one of its key traders, Bruno Lksil was reported for have been practicing assertive and risky trading for a long time. Traders in one of JP Morgan had even made bets against Lksil, who later came to be known as the “London Whale.” The U.S. government support of the bank in the event of its financial collapse “Too Big Too Fail” ensure the bank sees a high degree of faith in stability as an investment vehicle. The company has already received financial benefits worth $ 14 billion annually through borrowing rates, and increased investor investment. The government support is what allows the bank to ignore a permanent loss of “credit” as spoken by JP Morgan. These ethical violations violate all the main ethical theories.

Short essay

1. Explain the concept of random assignment in experimental design and why it is important.

Random assignment is one of the best of the experimental control techniques. By forming groups randomly, the groups become probabilistically equated on all known and unknown variables at the start of the experiment. The aim of the random assignment is to take a sample, often a convenience sample and divide the sample randomly into two or more groups that represent each other. Every research subject has an equal chance of being assigned to the treatment or control group. Randomization is often achieved through the use of computer programs that can generate random numbers. In experimental research, random assignment is more important that random selection because the aim of an experiment is to establish cause and effect relations. Random assignment plays a role in producing internal validity. In addition, random assignment helps control for the influence of extraneous or confounding variables. Random assignment implies that the researcher is taken out of the loop of making decisions about who goes to the different groups. A mathematic theory of probability is utilized to conduct the random assignment. Random assignment “equates the groups” on all known and unknown extraneous variables at the beginning of the experiment. It makes it possible that any significant difference between the groups is due to the effects of the treatment or program. As such, random assignment increases the confidence of the research to conclude or report a cause and effect relationship. It is a valid and powerful tool for drawing valid inferences about cause and effect.

2. People are often reluctant to discuss personal behaviors, religious beliefs and the like. Suggest ways a survey might be designed so as to maximize respondents’ comfort with such questions.

Surveys are vital strategies for gathering information and sometimes involve the collection of sensitive personal information or opinions. In order to increase responses to such questions, it is important first to establish a rapport with the respondent and to start the interview with questions that do not make the respondent feel vulnerable. Interviews and surveys are based on mutual respect, trust, and rapport, which may be difficult to establish sometimes. In order to improve response to such questions, it is critical to providing confidentiality and anonymity. In the introduction section of the survey questionnaire, it is essential to assure the response that his or her responses will be anonymous or confidential. Inform him or her that responses will be used in combination with others to learn about the phenomenon of interest. In addition, it is vital to obtain consent from the respondent. It is also essential to consider the setting of the survey. Will the question be asked in private or in public?

3. A newspaper reports from a survey that college students study on average seven hours a week for their classes. Identify the statistics and any other information that you would want to know from this survey before making generalizations about the student population at large, and explain why

Researchers use inferential statistics to assess whether it is possible to generalize findings. The generalization of the finding or the external validity of the finding is affected by numerous factors. Most of the reasons for the lack of generalization have to do with the potential sampling errors. These factors help one decide whether to generalize the findings or not. First, individuals who were pretested for the study might be less or more sensitive to the experimental variables. Secondly, the selection of the subjects or participants determines the generalization of result findings. In order to support the generalization of the findings, the researcher ought to use probability or random method of sampling. Thirdly, the experimental procedures and arrangements have the effect on the subjects in the experimental setting. It is not feasible to generalize the findings to persons no in the experimental setting. The nature of the instrument used to collect the data may influence the generalization of findings. Statistical theory severely limits the generality of the results to the same subject population sampled, he same experimental conditions and the same level of the independent variables. Adherence to these requirements may make the research futile. The internal validity of the study is also influenced by the testing effect, instrumentation, and statistical regression. History of all the events that occur beside that treatment and the events in the experiment influences generalization. The psychological and physical changes in the participants determines the level at which it is possible to generalize findings.

4. What statistics covered in this chapter (Ch. 6 and Ch. 7) would you consider essential for reporting the results of your research project, and why?

Often, researchers use a combination of both descriptive and inferential statistics. However, the most important statistics are the inferential statistics that include t-test, ANOVA, correlation, and regression. These statistics enables the researcher to estimate the probability that a sample represent the population from which it is derived. Researchers use inferential statistics to determine the extent and the direction of association between variables of interest. A t-test is very important when a research want to compare two groups of sample.. For example, if a research wants to use a control and experiment group, a t-test would help determine whether the two are significantly different. When more than two groups are used, t test becomes ineffective, and the researcher use ANOVA to determine the probability the groups are significantly different. Correlation statistics is useful in determining the extent and the direction of relationship or association between different variables. ANOVA is important in comparing values of multiple groups to determine the probability they are statistically different.

Descriptive statistics is also essential in the research because they help summarize and describe the sample. Most researchers begin their analysis by giving an overview of their sample, which often constitutes descriptive data. The research may give the mean age of the participants, the gender distribution, education level, income level and other demographic valuables using descriptive statistics such as mean, median, and mode. The measure of dispersions such as standard deviation and variance are essential in describing the sample in a detailed way. In most instances, the descriptive analysis is presented in the form of tables, graphs, and other visual elements.

5. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using semantic differential scales as a way of measuring human communication.

Semantic differential scale usually uses rating if stimuli using bipolar scales. Each bipolar scale is defined by a pair of contrasting adjectives such as fast-slow, cheap-expensive and high-low. One of the greatest advantages of the methods is its simplicity while producing results as compared to other complex scaling methods. Semantic differential scaling is easy and faster to administer, but it is insensitive to small differences in attitude. It is also very versatile, reliable and valid. Semantic differential identifies specific favorable or objectionable aspects of a complex and often multi-faceted issues and concepts. It provides an overall response scale score for the entire concept. However, they are only useful when exploring issues involving bipolar opposites. In addition, the adjectives may have different meanings for different people. Semantic differential scales are difficult to construct. Words that form authentic opposite had to be fund and pretested for meaning before use. As such, constructing the differential scales take a time to establish the reliability and validity.