| Course | NR 607 Diagnosis & Management in Psychiatric-Mental Health III Practicum |
|---|---|
| Week | 3 |
| Paper type | Safety plan write-up |
| Length | About 1,110 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | MSN, Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner (PMHNP) |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 607 Week 3
Safety Plan Write-Up: K.A.'s Plan in K.A.'s Own Words, From Warning Signs Through Things to Do Alone, People, Services and Means, With the Reason for Each Position
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 607: Diagnosis & Management in Psychiatric-Mental Health III Practicum
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Safety Plan Write-Up: K.A.'s Plan in K.A.'s Own Words, From Warning Signs Through Things to Do Alone, People, Services and Means, With the Reason for Each Position
Part 1: The Plan
My safety plan. Made with my nurse practitioner and my sister.
When I know things are getting bad:
- The voices start telling me to do stuff, not just talking.
- I stop going to work.
- I stop answering my sister's texts.
- I can't sleep two nights in a row.
Things I can do on my own first:
- Put my headphones on and play my playlist really loud.
- Walk to the park and do one lap.
- Take a shower.
- Remind myself: the voices are worst at night and better in the morning.
People and places that take my mind off it:
- The grocery store break room, if I am on shift.
- The library on Main Street.
People I can call for help:
- My sister, Dana: on my phone under "Dana."
- My coworker Luis, if Dana does not answer.
Professionals I can call:
- My nurse practitioner's clinic, weekdays 8 to 5.
- 988: I can phone or text it, day or night.
- Mobile crisis team: number saved as "Crisis team" in my phone.
- If I think I am going to act on it, I dial 911 or get to City Hospital's emergency department.
Keeping my environment safe:
- Dana keeps my pills in weekly packs at Dana's place and drops them off on Sundays.
- I do not keep extra pills in my room.
- If the voices tell me to walk into traffic, I stay inside and call Dana.
The one thing that matters most to me and is worth living for: my job and my niece.
Part 2: The Clinical Write-Up
Context. K.A., 27, schizophrenia, was discharged three weeks ago after an admission for voices ordering K.A. into traffic. K.A. attempted suicide by overdose in 2022. The plan was made at the first outpatient visit after discharge, with K.A.'s sister present for the second half, using the structured safety planning intervention (Stanley & Brown, 2012).
Why the warning signs are K.A.'s. Each sign came from K.A.'s own account of the weeks before the 2025 admission. "The voices start telling me to do stuff" is how K.A. described the change from background voices to commands. Clinician terms such as "command hallucinations" were deliberately left out.
Why things to do alone come first. K.A.'s distress peaks at night, when the sister is asleep and the clinic is closed. Steps K.A. can take alone are the most available at that hour. Loud music was K.A.'s own discovery; it drowns the voices for a while.
Why people come before services. K.A. trusts the sister and calls services reluctantly. Putting the sister first makes it more likely K.A. reaches someone. The coworker was added because the sister works nights twice a week.
Why services are listed with how to reach them. Each number is saved in K.A.'s phone under a name K.A. chose. The 988 line answers at any hour, which matters for a person whose worst hours are at night.
Means, and who holds them. In 2022, K.A. overdosed on stored tablets. Since then the sister has held medicines in weekly packs. This continues, and the plan states it. For the specific risk from command voices about traffic, the plan gives a concrete action: stay inside and call the sister. Nobody can remove traffic, but the plan names what to do instead.
Why Not a No-Harm Agreement
A promise not to act gives K.A. nothing to do when the voices start. The safety plan gives steps. In an emergency department study, patients given the plan plus follow-up phone calls went on to fewer suicidal acts in the next six months than those given usual care (Stanley et al., 2018).
How the Plan Fits K.A.'s Treatment
The plan works alongside, not instead of, treatment for the voices. Missed injections preceded the last two relapses, so the plan's first warning sign, the voices giving orders, is also a signal for the clinic to check whether the injection was given. The clinic's reminder text the day before each injection is noted on the plan's back page. If K.A. misses an injection, the clinic calls the sister the same day, because a missed injection is the most reliable early warning in K.A.'s history.
What K.A. Chose to Leave Out
K.A. did not want the parents listed as contacts, saying they "get too worried and make it worse." That choice is respected. K.A. also declined to list a faith leader, though K.A. attends church occasionally. The plan includes only people K.A. would actually call, because a contact the person would never phone is a line that gives false comfort to the clinician and none to the patient.
How the Plan Will Be Used
K.A. has a paper copy by the bed and a photo on the phone. The sister has a copy. For the coming three months, every visit includes a look at the plan, and updated after any crisis. The clinic will call K.A. within 48 hours of any missed injection, since missed injections preceded the last two relapses.
Why the Plan Matters More Given the Diagnosis
People with schizophrenia have a raised risk of suicide, especially in the early years after diagnosis and after discharge from hospital. K.A. is in both windows. K.A. also has persisting voices after several medicines, which may mean treatment-resistant illness under the consensus definition (Howes et al., 2017); until better treatment works, the plan is part of what keeps K.A. safe.
How the Sister Was Involved
The sister joined for the second half of the visit, after K.A. had made the first draft alone. K.A. chose what to share. The sister added the observation that K.A. stops answering texts before a relapse, which K.A. agreed to include as a warning sign. The sister also agreed to the means arrangement in writing.
What the Plan Cannot Do
It cannot prevent the voices. It depends on K.A. recognizing the warning signs, which may be harder during a relapse. That is why the sister also knows the warning signs and has agreed to call the clinic if K.A. stops answering texts for a day.
References
Howes, O. D., McCutcheon, R., Agid, O., de Bartolomeis, A., van Beveren, N. J. M., Birnbaum, M. L., Bloomfield, M. A. P., Bressan, R. A., Buchanan, R. W., Carpenter, W. T., Castle, D. J., Citrome, L., Daskalakis, Z. J., Davidson, M., Drake, R. J., Dursun, S., Ebdrup, B. H., Elkis, H., Falkai, P., ... Correll, C. U. (2017). Treatment-resistant schizophrenia: Treatment Response and Resistance in Psychosis (TRRIP) working group consensus guidelines on diagnosis and terminology. American Journal of Psychiatry, 174(3), 216-229. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2016.16050503
Stanley, B., & Brown, G. K. (2012). Safety planning intervention: A brief intervention to mitigate suicide risk. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 19(2), 256-264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2011.01.001
Stanley, B., Brown, G. K., Brenner, L. A., Galfalvy, H. C., Currier, G. W., Knox, K. L., Chaudhury, S. R., Bush, A. L., & Green, K. L. (2018). Comparison of the safety planning intervention with follow-up vs usual care of suicidal patients treated in the emergency department. JAMA Psychiatry, 75(9), 894-900. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.1776
The Chamberlain NR 607 Week 3 instructions
The Week 3 submission holds two documents. The plan itself is short, in the second person and in language the person actually used, ordered from what they can do alone, through people they can reach, to services that answer at three in the morning. Nothing in it should require being calm enough to interpret it. The clinical write-up explains why each item sits where it does, how means are restricted and who holds them, and how the plan will be used. Most rubrics mark down a plan written in clinical language, a no-harm agreement in place of a plan, means restriction offered as advice with nobody named and warning signs written by the clinician.
How the NR 607 Week 3 example is put together
The sample's plan lists four warning signs in the person's words, such as the voices telling them to do things, then actions alone, places, people with how to reach them, professional services including 988 and the emergency department, and means arrangements with the sister holding weekly pill packs. The write-up gives context, explains why each warning sign is the person's own, why actions alone come first at night, why people come before services and how means are held. It rejects a no-harm agreement with evidence, explains the plan's importance after discharge, describes how the sister was involved and what the person chose to leave out, and covers use and limits.
NR 607 Week 3 rubric: what full points look like
The most expensive loss is a plan in clinical language the person would have to translate while distressed; this plan uses the person's words throughout. A no-harm agreement standing in for a plan costs the next share, and the write-up explains why one was not used. Means restriction offered as advice loses a row, while the sister is named as holding the medicines. Warning signs written by the clinician lose marks, and each sign here came from the person's account. Explaining the order of each section earns the rationale criterion. Recording what the person chose to leave out shows consent. Explaining how the plan fits ongoing treatment shows it is part of care, not separate from it.
NR 607 Week 3 help: mistakes that cost points
Weak NR 607 Week 3 plans use terms such as command hallucinations and coping strategies. Others replace the plan with a promise not to act. Many recommend removing means without saying who will hold them. Warning signs are often written in the clinician's terms. The order of sections is rarely explained. Write the plan with the person in their own words, order it from self to people to services, name who holds any means and explain each choice in a separate write-up. If your patient's situation differs, share their warning signs and supports, and a two-part sample can be prepared. Ask the person what they want left out.
Get a NR 607 Week 3 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 3 prompt from your classroom and whatever template your section supplies for the plan itself, and a custom example is written to both and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free. Bring the case you were given and it will be built on that.
More NR 607 papers and PMHNP samples
- NR 607 Week 1: Missing Fact in the Record Post
- NR 607 Week 2: Longitudinal Case Write-Up
- NR 607 Week 4: Care Coordination Note
- NR 607 Week 5: Case Analysis
- NR 607 Week 6: Transition of Care Summary
- NR 607 Week 7: Consultation Write-up
- NR 607 Week 8: Synthesis Case Paper
- NR 606 Week 3: Comorbidity Case Write-Up
- NR 546 Week 3: Medication Selection Rationale
- NR 605 Week 3: Treatment Plan Write-Up
- NR 547 Week 3: Diagnostic Formulation
NR 607 Week 3 questions, answered
Is a safety plan the same as a risk assessment?
No, and mixing the two is the common error. An assessment describes where risk stands at a moment. A plan says what happens next and who does what. This course sits with the second, because managing illness over time means safety gets arranged in advance and revisited, rather than judged once and written up as a rating that ages badly.
How specific should the contacts be?
Specific enough to use. A name, a number, and a sentence the person can say when somebody picks up. Plans listing a relationship with no number, or a service with no hours, fail at the point of use. Where a contact might not answer, a second option belongs beside the first rather than further down the page where nobody looks.
What if the person will not agree to a step?
Write what they will agree to and record the gap. A plan the person rejects is not in force, however sound it looks in the chart. Documenting the refusal, the reason given and what was agreed instead reads stronger than a complete-looking plan nobody consented to, and it tells the next clinician exactly where the negotiation stopped.
Where can I find a free NR 607 Week 3 sample paper?
The full safety plan write-up, with the plan in the person's own words and the clinical rationale, is on this page.
Why do things to do alone come first in the NR 607 Week 3 plan?
The person's distress peaks at night, when the sister is asleep and the clinic is closed, so steps the person can take alone are the most available.