PUBH 6331 Week 3 Standard Memo Example

Course	PUBH 6331 Global Health and Social Justice
Week	Week 3
Paper type	Standard memo
Length	About 810 words, 4 pages
Format	Memo, APA 7 citations
School	Walden University
Program	Master of Public Health (MPH)
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for PUBH 6331 Week 3

Memorandum

To: Policy Team, National Palliative Care Association (composite)

From: MPH Policy Intern

Date: Month Day, Year

Re: Choosing the standard on which our advocacy for oral morphine access will rest

The Question

Our association argues that people dying of cancer and other serious illness in this country are wrongly denied oral morphine. Clinicians tell us the medicine is either missing from district hospitals or locked in a single cabinet at the regional referral hospital. Before we bring this argument to the ministry, we need to decide which standard it rests on. A complaint that the gap is unfair persuades sympathizers; a claim that someone has broken a duty can move officials. This memo weighs four candidate standards and recommends one.

What this page is doingSeparating persuasion of sympathizers from obligation of officials explains why the choice of standard is worth a memo.

Why the Gap Is Real

Global consumption of opioid pain medicines more than doubled between 2001-03 and 2011-13, but nearly all of the increase occurred in North America, western and central Europe and Oceania; use in Africa, much of Asia, Central and South America and eastern Europe remained low (Berterame et al., 2016). The same study found that barriers reported by governments included lack of training, fear of dependence, limited funds, sourcing problems and burdensome regulation. These sources establish the facts. They do not establish who must act.

Candidate 1: The Essential Medicines List

Oral morphine appears on the World Health Organization's Model List of Essential Medicines, both as an immediate-release and a modified-release form (World Health Organization, 2023). The list carries real authority with ministries, and our national list copies it. But the model list is guidance on which medicines a health system should prioritize. It does not itself say that any government must make them available. On its own, it shows what should be stocked, not whose duty it is to stock it.

Candidate 2: The Drug Control Treaty

The 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, which our country has ratified, opens by recognizing that narcotic drugs remain indispensable for the relief of pain and that adequate provision must be made to ensure their availability for medical purposes (United Nations, 1961). This is closer to a duty, and it binds the country as treaty law. The difficulty is that the treaty's operative articles deal mostly with control: estimates, licensing, record keeping and preventing diversion. In practice, officials read it as a set of restrictions, and the barriers Berterame et al. (2016) describe show that control has often crowded out availability. Arguing from this treaty asks officials to read it against their usual habit.

Candidate 3: The World Health Assembly Resolution

In 2014 the World Health Assembly adopted a resolution urging member states to strengthen palliative care as part of comprehensive care throughout the life course and to ensure access to essential medicines for it. Our government voted for it. A resolution, however, is a commitment of intent rather than a legal obligation, and it uses the language of urging. It is useful as evidence that the government has already accepted the goal.

Candidate 4: The Right to Health's Core Obligations

The UN committee that interprets the right to health lists among a state's core obligations the provision of essential drugs as defined by the WHO's essential drugs program, and it states that core obligations cannot be set aside for lack of resources (Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 2000, para. 43). This standard does what the others do not: it names the state as the duty holder, connects directly to the essential medicines list for its content and removes the most common excuse, cost. The committee also describes attention to the dying and to the avoidance of unnecessary pain as part of the right to health (Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 2000, para. 25).

Table 1

The Four Standards Compared

Standard	Names a duty holder	Legally binding here	Specifies morphine	Main weakness \|
Essential medicines list	No	No	Yes	Guidance only \|
Drug control treaty	Yes, the state	Yes	Covers narcotic drugs generally	Read mainly as control \|
Assembly resolution	Urges states	No	Essential palliative medicines	Intent, not obligation \|
Core obligations under the right to health	Yes, the state	Yes, through treaty ratification	Through the essential medicines list	Interpretation by a committee, not text of the treaty \|

Note. Assessment prepared for this memo.

Recommendation

Rest the argument on the core obligation under the right to health, use the essential medicines list to define its content, and cite the drug control treaty's own recognition of medical need to answer officials who treat morphine only as a control problem. The assembly resolution can show that the government has already agreed to the goal. In practice, the message to the ministry becomes: oral morphine is an essential medicine, providing essential medicines is a core duty the state cannot defer for cost, and the drug control treaty itself requires adequate supply for medical use.

References

Berterame, S., Erthal, J., Thomas, J., Fellner, S., Vosse, B., Clare, P., Hao, W., Johnson, D. T., Mohar, A., Pavadia, J., Samak, A. K. E., Sipp, W., Sumyai, V., Suryawati, S., Toufiq, J., Yans, R., & Mattick, R. P. (2016). Use of and barriers to access to opioid analgesics: A worldwide, regional, and national study. The Lancet, 387(10028), 1644-1656. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00161-6

Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (2000). General comment No. 14: The right to the highest attainable standard of health (art. 12) (E/C.12/2000/4). United Nations. https://undocs.org/E/C.12/2000/4

United Nations. (1961). Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961. https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/single-convention.html

World Health Organization. (2023). WHO model list of essential medicines: 23rd list. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-MHP-HPS-EML-2023.02

PUBH 6331 Week 3 instructions, in plain terms

Standard memos ask students to identify the norm on which a justice argument rests. Typical prompts require several candidate standards, such as treaties, guidelines, resolutions, ethical principles or national laws, an assessment of each and a recommendation of the one that best supports a claim of obligation. Students are expected to explain who each standard binds and how strongly. The memo is usually addressed to a group planning advocacy and runs a few pages. Instructors reward memos that distinguish guidance from obligation and recognize that a standard may be legally binding but interpreted narrowly in practice. The ability to combine standards, using one for the duty and another for its content, is often what separates excellent work from adequate work.

How the PUBH 6331 Week 3 example is put together

The memo states the question and explains why the choice of standard matters for officials. A section documents the gap using consumption data and reported barriers. Each of four candidate standards then receives its own section describing what it says, its authority and its weakness. The essential medicines list is treated as content without duty, the drug control treaty as binding but read mainly as control, the resolution as intent and the core obligation as the standard that names the state and removes cost as an excuse. The four are then set against each other in one table, and the recommendation combines them into a single message for the ministry.

Where the marks sit in the PUBH 6331 Week 3 rubric

Graders assess whether candidate standards are described accurately, whether each is evaluated on clear criteria and whether the recommendation follows from the analysis. Accuracy matters especially for legal instruments: misstating whether a document is binding or whom it addresses costs points. Analytical depth comes from explaining how a standard is used in practice, not only what its text says. Credit is given for combining standards strategically. Memo form, with a clear question, sections and a recommendation, is part of the grade. Sources should include both the standards themselves and evidence of the problem, cited in APA style. Memos that pick a standard without weighing alternatives typically score lower on analysis. Pointing out that an assembly resolution shows the government has already accepted the goal is the kind of strategic reading graders notice.

PUBH 6331 Week 3 help from the desk

Students often choose the most familiar standard without asking whether it actually creates a duty. For each candidate, ask three questions: who does it bind, how strongly, and does it say what must be provided? Read the operative text, not only summaries. Notice when a binding document is applied narrowly, as with drug control treaties. Consider whether one standard can supply content while another supplies the duty. Write the recommendation as a message a decision maker could act on. For help weighing standards on the issue your course assigned, send the issue and the documents you have found. Keep each standard's exact name and date in your notes, because versions change and a superseded text weakens the memo.

Get a PUBH 6331 Week 3 example written to your instructions

Include the fairness claim under examination alongside the Week 3 prompt and rubric, and a free first memo returns inside 24-48h. Every standard is characterized from its own text or its official interpretation, and none is paraphrased into a stronger obligation than the document states.

More PUBH 6331 papers and MPH samples

PUBH 6331 Week 3 questions, answered

Where can I find a free PUBH 6331 Week 3 sample paper?

The full Week 3 memo is reproduced above, weighing four standards for oral morphine access in a composite low-income country.

Is the WHO essential medicines list legally binding?

No; it guides which medicines health systems should prioritize but does not itself oblige governments to provide them.

What does the 1961 drug control treaty say about medical use?

It recognizes narcotic drugs as indispensable for pain relief and calls for adequate provision for medical purposes.

Why does the memo choose the right to health's core obligations?

They name the state as duty holder, link to the essential medicines list and cannot be set aside for lack of resources.

Why has opioid pain relief remained scarce in many countries?

Reported barriers include limited training, fear of dependence, limited funds, sourcing problems and burdensome regulation.