For nurses, the most important part of their job is delivering quality care. But there is more to high-quality care than knowing diseases; nurses also act as patient advocates. They can help patients make informed decisions regarding their health, including helping them navigate a complex medical system, translating medical terms and helping patients make ethical decisions. Because they have the most direct interaction with patients, nurses are ideally positioned to be advocates. When nurses successfully advocate for their patients, their work promotes the healing process. As advocates of patients, nurses must understand how information technology affects the patient. Technology helps contribute to patient-centered care by fostering communication between providers and patients via online portals, text messaging, and email. It also increases access to information such as online medical records, which can improve self-monitoring and patient convenience.
This sobering statement is a striking and brutally honest assessment of the 20th-century, one which was characterized by unprecedented violence. Examples globally demonstrate this, including the 1994 Rwandan genocide, in which an estimated 800,000 people were systematically massacred and the Cambodian genocide between 1975-8 in which, “The murders of 2.2 million people were orchestrated.” (Etcheson 2005, 118-120) Since the UN’s inception in October 1945, it would appear clear, therefore, that, in a century of unimaginable violence, the unilateral protection of human rights has been an impossible task. This is where the concept of Responsibility to Protect has become increasingly important in preventing, mitigating and stabilising ‘mass conflict’ in the 21st-century.
When assessing this question as a whole it is important to first understand what is meant by the phrase ‘Responsibility to Protect’, hereinafter referred to as R2P. The world summit outcome document of 2005 defines it as entailing that, “Each individual State has the responsibility to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.”(World Summit 2005) It is also very clear that the concept of R2P does not solely cover protection but also “prevention of such crimes through appropriate and necessary means.”(Ibid) R2P, as outlined by the UN, rests upon three key pillars, the first being that the state has the primary obligation to protect its citizens from mass atrocities. This is connected to the second pillar which places onus on the international community to assist states in protecting its citizens. The final pillar identifies and clarifies the action which can be taken by the international community in the event that a state is failing to protect its population or indeed is perpetrating acts of mass atrocity, this action includes collective use of force if it is approved by the UN Security Council.
Having understood what is meant by R2P, within this essay, I will explain why the doctrine came about highlighting key events which may have compelled the UN to take action. In addition whilst assessing the impact of the doctrine on 21st-century African conflict, both positive and negative, I will consider some of the criticisms of the doctrine investigating how they can be applied within the context of recent African conflict. Overall this essay will conclude that a united response from the international community in the wake of the events which led up t
