Vulnerable populations in the USA

Compare vulnerable populations. Describe an example of one of these groups in the United States or from another country. Explain why the population is designated as "vulnerable." Include the number of individuals belonging to this group and the specific challenges or issues involved. Discuss why these populations are unable to advocate for themselves, the ethical issues that must be considered when working with these groups, and how nursing advocacy would be beneficial.

Sample Answer

Stanhope and Lancaster (2008) define vulnerable populations as “those defined at a greater risk for poor health status and health care access” (p.712). Vulnerable population can also include the neighborhood where an individual resides because healthcare resources may be limited. The focus of this paper will to look at why a given group of demography is considered vulnerable and such will delve on issues or otherwise challenges that surrounds it. It will also include the pertinent reasons why this groups are unable access for the themselves and further, the paper will focus on looking at how nursing advocacy will help to sort out some of the serious issues raised by the cohort.


Both Aristotle, a tremendous Greek logician, and Thomas Hobbes, an English current thinker who is well known for his work on political reasoning and philosophical absolutism. Aristotle lived in a Greek Empire when Alexander the Great vanquished the World. Hobbes lived during a war too: English Civil War in the 17 th history. It isn't hard to accept that the war conditions affected their standpoints: this end can clarify the contrasts between their ways to deal with life, a man in condition of nature, human affiliations, and so on. The fundamental disparity depends on their stance on the normal state of a man: for Aristotle, a man is dependent upon network as a "by naturr political creature", yet for Hobbes," man is normally requested toward the individual, and that individual is himself" . In my perspective, each man is individual as per Hobbes and only a piece of entire as indicated by Aristotle in a characteristic state.

By saying " a person who is unsocial normally and not inadvertently is either underneath our notice or more than human" he inferred that lone a couple of individuals who are out of the state can be experienced. Political city state itself appears to be normal and was framed normally; in this way, Aristotle clarifies

how the city was normally framed by people as far as regular affiliation. In the first place, man and lady covers the most internal part so as to keep up the age, and , accordingly, family is built up. From that point, town appeared to be earth shattering and is made to manage the cost of more than every day needs. Correspondingly, the external component city/state was set up to stock self-getting the job done things. Therefore, state appears to be very regular and important to Aristotle. Notwithstanding the structure,there are slaves also: traditional and natural.(the first-who incured in light of war, the second-who can not administer their wants)

Rather than Aristotle, a characteristic state of a man doesn't bring about political state as a condition of nature however a 'single, poor, awful, brutish, and short' life as per T.Hobbes. A condition of nature includes a center of 'bellum omnium contra omnes (a war of all against all)'. In spite of the fact that people are equivalent, physical weakness may prompt trouble for certain individuals to guard themselves and properties; consequently, they should come to understanding and pick one to give total power. Since without strong supreme ruler all men will execute one another, they need to pull back their opportunity and let the one control them.