This week you will discuss whether psychotherapy has a biological basis. Explain

This week you will discuss whether psychotherapy has a biological basis. Explain how culture, religion, and socioeconomics might influence one’s perspective on the value of psychotherapy treatments. You will also be discussing legal and ethical considerations for group and family therapy and how they differ from individual therapy.  You will analyze the impact of legal and ethical considerations on therapeutic approaches for clients in the group, individual, and family therapy. 
Support your rationale with at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources and explain why each of your supporting sources is considered scholarly. Attach the PDFs of your sources.  
Respond to at least two of your classmates’ discussions on 2 different days.
Discussion: Biological Basis and Ethical/Legal Considerations of Psychotherapy
Many studies have found that psychotherapy is as effective as psychopharmacology in terms of influencing changes in behaviors, symptoms of anxiety, and changes in mental state. Changes influenced by psychopharmacology can be explained by the biological basis of treatments. But how does psychotherapy achieve these changes? Does psychotherapy share common neuronal pathways with psychopharmacology?
Psychotherapy is used with individuals as well as in groups or families. The idea of discussing confidential information with a patient in front of an audience is probably quite foreign to you. However, in group and family therapy, this is precisely what the psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner does. In your role, learning how to provide this type of therapy within the limits of confidentiality is essential.
Photo Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto
For this Discussion, you will consider whether psychotherapy also has a biological basis and analyze the ways in which legal and ethical considerations differ in the individual, family, and group therapy settings.
To prepare:
Review this week’s Learning Resources, reflecting on foundational concepts of psychotherapy, biological and social impacts on psychotherapy, and legal and ethical issues across the modalities (individual, family, and group).
Search the Walden Library databases for scholarly, peer-reviewed articles that inform and support your academic perspective on these topics.
By Day 3
Post an explanation of whether psychotherapy has a biological basis. Explain how culture, religion, and socioeconomics might influence one’s perspective on the value of psychotherapy treatments. Describe how legal and ethical considerations for group and family therapy differ from those for individual therapy, and explain how these differences might impact your therapeutic approaches for clients in group, individual, and family therapy. Support your rationale with at least three peer-reviewed, evidence-based sources and explain why each of your supporting sources is considered scholarly. Attach the PDFs of your sources. 
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.
By Day 6
Respond to at least two of your colleagues on 2 different days by providing an additional scholarly resource that supports or challenges their position, along with a brief explanation.
Main Posting:
Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s).
Is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
No less than 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least 3 current credible sources.
Good
Point range: 80–89 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to most of the discussion question(s).
Is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
50% of the post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least 3 credible references.
Fair
Point range: 70–79 31 (31%) – 34 (34%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references.
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 30 (30%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s).
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only 1 or no credible references.
Main Posting:
Writing–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Written clearly and concisely.
Contains no grammatical or spelling errors.
Further adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Good
Point range: 80–89 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Written concisely.
May contain one to two grammatical or spelling errors.
Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Fair
Point range: 70–79 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Written somewhat concisely.
May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors.
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Posting:
Timely and full participation–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 9 (9%) – 10 (10%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.
Posts main discussion by due date.
Good
Point range: 80–89 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Posts main discussion by due date.
Meets requirements for full participation.
Fair
Point range: 70–79 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Posts main discussion by due date.
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation.
Does not post main discussion by due date.
First Response:
Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Responds to questions posed by faculty.
The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Good
Point range: 80–89 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
Fair
Point range: 70–79 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
First Response:Writing–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.
Good
Point range: 80–89 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.
Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.
Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.
Response is written in Standard, Edited English.
Fair
Point range: 70–79 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Few or no credible sources are cited.
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication.
Response to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
First Response:Timely and full participation–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.
Posts by due date.
Good
Point range: 80–89 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation.
Posts by due date.
Fair
Point range: 70–79 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation.
Does not post by due date.
Second Response:Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 9 (9%) – 9 (9%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Responds to questions posed by faculty.
The use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Good
Point range: 80–89 8 (8%) – 8 (8%)
Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting.
Fair
Point range: 70–79 7 (7%) – 7 (7%)
Response is on topic, may have some depth.
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 6 (6%)
Response may not be on topic, lacks depth.
Second Response:Writing–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 6 (6%) – 6 (6%)
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Response to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in Standard, Edited English.
Good
Point range: 80–89 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues.
Response to faculty questions are mostly answered, if posed.
Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources.
Response is written in Standard, Edited English.
Fair
Point range: 70–79 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Response posed in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Few or no credible sources are cited.
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 3 (3%)
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective communication.
Response to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited.
Second Response:Timely and full participation–
Excellent
Point range: 90–100 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for timely, full, and active participation.
Posts by due date.
Good
Point range: 80–89 4 (4%) – 4 (4%)
Meets requirements for full participation.
Posts by due date.
Fair
Point range: 70–79 3 (3%) – 3 (3%)
Posts by due date.
Poor
Point range: 0–69 0 (0%) – 2 (2%)
Does not meet requirements for full participation.
Does not post by due date.
Total Points: 100
Name: NRNP_6645_Week1_Discussion_Rubric
Learning Resources
Required Readings (click to expand/reduce)
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 
Nichols, M., & Davis, S. D. (2020). The essentials of family therapy (7th ed.). Pearson.
Chapter 2, “Basic Techniques of Family Therapy” (pp. 33–35 only)
Petiprin, A. (2016). Psychiatric and mental health nursing. Nursing Theory. https://www.nursing-theory.org/theories-and-models/psychiatric-and-mental-health-nursing.php
Wheeler, K. (Ed.). (2020). Psychotherapy for the advanced practice psychiatric nurse: A how-to guide for evidence-based practice (3rd ed.). Springer Publishing.
Chapter 1, “The Nurse Psychotherapist and a Framework for Practice”
Chapter 2, “The Neurophysiology of Trauma and Psychotherapy”
Bambling, M. (2013). Neurobiology of behavior change [Video/DVD] https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/neurobiology-of-behavior-change
Boyd, L. (2017, April 27). After watching this, your brain will not be the same [Video]. [TEDxVancouver] YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNHBMFCzznE
Harrigan, J. (Director). (2007). Human brain development: Nature and nurture [Video/DVD]. Davidson Films. https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/human-brain-development-nature-and-nurture
Shuttlesworth, M. (2013, August 14). Ethical and legal issues in abnormal psychology [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRXibYiorQ0