View topic on PhilPapers for more information
Related categories

63 found
Order:
More results on PhilPapers
1 — 50 / 63
  1. (Draft) The Prospects for Prospect Utilitarianism.Benjamin Davies - manuscript
    Sufficientarianism is a view of distributive justice that places importance on one or more ‘thresholds’, whereby those who are above the threshold have much weaker claims to additional benefits than those below, and may even have no claims at all. Hun Chung has recently argued for a new theory of distributive justice that overcomes two central problems faced by sufficientarianism. Sufficientarianism cannot give intuitively compelling answers to ‘lifeboat cases’, where we can save the lives of some but not all of (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. ‘Personal Health Surveillance’: The Use of mHealth in Healthcare Responsibilisation.Ben Davies - forthcoming - Public Health Ethics.
    There is an ongoing increase in the use of mobile health technologies that patients can use to monitor health-related outcomes and behaviours. While the dominant narrative around mHealth focuses on patient empowerment, there is potential for mHealth to fit into a growing push for patients to take personal responsibility for their health. I call the first of these uses ‘medical monitoring’, and the second ‘personal health surveillance’. After outlining two problems which the use of mHealth might seem to enable us (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Love Thy Neighbour? Allocating Vaccines in a World of Competing Obligations.Kyle Ferguson & Arthur L. Caplan - forthcoming - Journal of Medical Ethics:medethics-2020-106887.
    Although a safe, effective, and licensed coronavirus vaccine does not yet exist, there is already controversy over how it ought to be allocated. Justice is clearly at stake, but it is unclear what justice requires in the international distribution of a scarce vaccine during a pandemic. Many are condemning ‘vaccine nationalism’ as an obstacle to equitable global distribution. We argue that limited national partiality in allocating vaccines will be a component of justice rather than an obstacle to it. For there (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4. Why We Should Stop Using Animal-Derived Products on Patients Without Their Consent.Daniel Rodger - forthcoming - Journal of Medical Ethics.
    Medicines and medical devices containing animal-derived ingredients are frequently used on patients without their informed consent, despite a significant proportion of patients wanting to know if an animal-derived product is going to be used in their care. Here, I outline three arguments for why this practice is wrong. Firstly, I argue that using animal-derived medical products on patients without their informed consent undermines respect for their autonomy. Secondly, it risks causing non-trivial psychological harm. Thirdly, it is morally inconsistent to respect (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Phantom Premise and a Shape-Shifting Ism: Reply to Hassoun.Kyle Ferguson & Arthur Caplan - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (11).
    In ‘Against vaccine nationalism’, Nicole Hassoun misrepresents our argument, distorts our position and ignores crucial distinctions we present in our article, ‘Love thy neighbor? Allocating vaccines in a world of competing obligations’. She has created a strawman that does not resemble our position. In this reply, we address two features of ‘Against vaccine nationalism’. First, we address a phantom premise. Hassoun misattributes to us a thesis, according to which citizen-directed duties are stronger than noncitizen-directed duties. This thesis is a figment (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Difficult Trade-Offs in Response to COVID-19: The Case for Open and Inclusive Decision-Making.Ole Frithjof Norheim, Joelle Abi-Rached, Liam Kofi Bright, Kristine Baeroe, Octavio Ferraz, Siri Gloppen & Alex Voorhoeve - 2021 - Nature Medicine 27:10-13.
    We argue that deliberative decision-making that is inclusive, transparent and accountable can contribute to more trustworthy and legitimate decisions on difficult ethical questions and political trade-offs during the pandemic and beyond.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7. Allocation of Scarce Biospecimens for Use in Research.Leah Pierson, Sophia Gibert, Benjamin Berkman, Marion Danis & Joseph Millum - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (11):740-743.
    Hundreds of millions of rare biospecimens are stored in laboratories and biobanks around the world. Often, the researchers who possess these specimens do not plan to use them, while other researchers limit the scope of their work because they cannot acquire biospecimens that meet their needs. This situation raises an important and underexplored question: how should scientists allocate biospecimens that they do not intend to use? We argue that allocators should aim to maximise the social value of the research enterprise (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. Pandemic Ethics: 8 Big Questions of COVID-19.Ben Bramble - 2020 - Sydney: Bartleby Books.
    A clear and provocative introduction to the ethics of COVID-19, suitable for university-level students, academics, and policymakers, as well as the general reader. It is also an original contribution to the emerging literature on this important topic. The author has made it available Open Access, so that it can be downloaded and read for free by all those who are interested in these issues. Key features include: -/- A neat organisation of the ethical issues raised by the pandemic. An exploration (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. Ethical Allocation of Remdesivir.Parker Crutchfield, Tyler S. Gibb, Michael J. Redinger & William Fales - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (7):84-86.
    As the federal government distributed remdesivir to some of the states COVID-19 hit hardest, policymakers scrambled to develop criteria to allocate the drug to their hospitals. Our state, Michigan, was among those states to receive an initial quantity of the drug from the U.S. government. The disparities in burden of disease in Michigan are striking. Detroit has a death rate more than three times the state average. Our recommendation to the state was that it should prioritize the communities that bear (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. From Sufficient Health to Sufficient Responsibility.Ben Davies & Julian Savulescu - 2020 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 17 (3):423-433.
    The idea of using responsibility in the allocation of healthcare resources has been criticized for, among other things, too readily abandoning people who are responsible for being very badly off. One response to this problem is that while responsibility can play a role in resource allocation, it cannot do so if it will leave those who are responsible below a “sufficiency” threshold. This paper considers first whether a view can be both distinctively sufficientarian and allow responsibility to play a role (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  11. An Ethical Framework for Global Vaccine Allocation.Ezekiel J. Emanuel, Govind Persad, Adam Kern, Allen E. Buchanan, Cecile Fabre, Daniel Halliday, Joseph Heath, Lisa M. Herzog, R. J. Leland, Ephrem T. Lemango, Florencia Luna, Matthew McCoy, Ole F. Norheim, Trygve Ottersen, G. Owen Schaefer, Kok-Chor Tan, Christopher Heath Wellman, Jonathan Wolff & Henry S. Richardson - 2020 - Science 1:DOI: 10.1126/science.abe2803.
    In this article, we propose the Fair Priority Model for COVID-19 vaccine distribution, and emphasize three fundamental values we believe should be considered when distributing a COVID-19 vaccine among countries: Benefiting people and limiting harm, prioritizing the disadvantaged, and equal moral concern for all individuals. The Priority Model addresses these values by focusing on mitigating three types of harms caused by COVID-19: death and permanent organ damage, indirect health consequences, such as health care system strain and stress, as well as (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  12. Disability Rights as a Necessary Framework for Crisis Standards of Care and the Future of Health Care.Laura Guidry-Grimes, Katie Savin, Joseph A. Stramondo, Joel Michael Reynolds, Marina Tsaplina, Teresa Blankmeyer Burke, Angela Ballantyne, Eva Feder Kittay, Devan Stahl, Jackie Leach Scully, Rosemarie Garland-Thomson, Anita Tarzian, Doron Dorfman & Joseph J. Fins - 2020 - Hastings Center Report 50 (3):28-32.
    In this essay, we suggest practical ways to shift the framing of crisis standards of care toward disability justice. We elaborate on the vision statement provided in the 2010 Institute of Medicine (National Academy of Medicine) “Summary of Guidance for Establishing Crisis Standards of Care for Use in Disaster Situations,” which emphasizes fairness; equitable processes; community and provider engagement, education, and communication; and the rule of law. We argue that interpreting these elements through disability justice entails a commitment to both (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  13. Egalitarian Provision of Necessary Medical Treatment.Robert C. Hughes - 2020 - The Journal of Ethics 24 (1):55-78.
    Considerations of autonomy and independence, properly understood, support strictly egalitarian provision of necessary medical treatment. If the financially better-off can purchase access to necessary medical treatments that the financially less well-off cannot purchase without help, then their discretionary power to give or to withhold monetary gifts indirectly gives them the power to make life-and-death or sickness-and-health decisions for others. To prevent private citizens from having this objectionable form of power, government must ensure that citizens’ finances do not affect their access (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. First Come, First Served?Tyler M. John & Joseph Millum - 2020 - Ethics 130 (2):179-207.
    Waiting time is widely used in health and social policy to make resource allocation decisions, yet no general account of the moral significance of waiting time exists. We provide such an account. We argue that waiting time is not intrinsically morally significant, and that the first person in a queue for a resource does not ipso facto have a right to receive that resource first. However, waiting time can and sometimes should play a role in justifying allocation decisions. First, there (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  15. The Case for Valuing Non-Health and Indirect Benefits.Govind Persad & Jessica du Toit - 2020 - In Ole F. Norheim, Ezekiel J. Emanuel & Joseph Millum (eds.), Global Health Priority-Setting: Beyond Cost-Effectiveness. New York, NY, USA: pp. 207-222.
    Health policy is only one part of social policy. Although spending administered by the health sector constitutes a sizeable fraction of total state spending in most countries, other sectors such as education and transportation also represent major portions of national budgets. Additionally, though health is one important aspect of economic and social activity, people pursue many other goals in their social and economic lives. Similarly, direct benefits—those that are immediate results of health policy choices—are only a small portion of the (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  16. Age Change in Healthcare Settings: A Reply to Lippert-Rasmussen and Petersen.Joona Räsänen - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (9):636-637.
    Lippert-Rasmussen and Petersen discuss my ‘Moral case for legal age change’ in their article ‘Age change, official age and fairness in health’. They argue that in important healthcare settings (such as distributing vital organs for dying patients), the state should treat people on the basis of their chronological age because chronological age is a better proxy for what matters from the point of view of justice than adjusted official age. While adjusted legal age should not be used in deciding who (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  17. Healthy Nails Versus Long Lives: An Analysis of a Dutch Priority Setting Proposal.Alex Voorhoeve - 2020 - In Nir Eyal, Samia A. Hurst, Christopher Murray, S. Andrew Schroeder & Daniel Wikler (eds.), Measuring the Global Burden of Disease: Philosophical Dimensions. New York, NY, USA: pp. 273-292.
    How should governments balance saving people from very large individual disease burdens (such as an early death) against saving them from middling burdens (such as erectile dysfunction) and minor burdens (such as nail fungus)? This chapter considers this question through an analysis of a priority-setting proposal in the Netherlands, on which avoiding a multitude of middling burdens takes priority over saving one person from early death, but no number of very small burdens can take priority over avoiding one death. It (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  18. Setting Priorities Fairly in Response to Covid-19: Identifying Overlapping Consensus and Reasonable Disagreement.David Wasserman, Govind Persad & Joseph Millum - 2020 - Journal of Law and the Biosciences 1:doi:10.1093/jlb/lsaa044.
    Proposals for allocating scarce lifesaving resources in the face of the Covid-19 pandemic have aligned in some ways and conflicted in others. This paper attempts a kind of priority setting in addressing these conflicts. In the first part, we identify points on which we do not believe that reasonable people should differ—even if they do. These are (i) the inadequacy of traditional clinical ethics to address priority-setting in a pandemic; (ii) the relevance of saving lives; (iii) the flaws of first-come, (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. The Fifth Face of Fair Subject Selection: Population Grouping.Tomasz Żuradzki - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (2):41-43.
    The article by MacKay and Saylor (2020) claims that the principle of fair subject selection yields conflicting imperatives (e.g. in the case of pregnant women) and should be understood as “a bundle of four distinct sub-principles” (i.e. fair inclusion, burden sharing, opportunity, distribution of third-party risks), each having conflicting normative recommendations (MacKay and Saylor 2020). The authors also offer guidance as to how we should navigate between subprinciples that may conflict with each other. The problem is a crucial one since (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. Bursting Bubbles? QALYs and Discrimination.Ben Davies - 2019 - Utilitas 31 (2):191-202.
    The use of Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) in healthcare allocation has been criticized as discriminatory against people with disabilities. This article considers a response to this criticism from Nick Beckstead and Toby Ord. They say that even if QALYs are discriminatory, attempting to avoid discrimination – when coupled with other central principles that an allocation system should favour – sometimes leads to irrationality in the form of cyclic preferences. I suggest that while Beckstead and Ord have identified a problem, it (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. Medical Crowdfunding, Political Marginalization, and Government Responsiveness: A Reply to Larry Temkin.Alida Liberman - 2019 - Journal of Practical Ethics 7 (1):40-48.
    Larry Temkin draws on the work of Angus Deaton to argue that countries with poor governance sometimes rely on charitable giving and foreign aid in ways that enable them to avoid relying on their own citizens; this can cause them to be unresponsive to their citizens’ needs and thus prevent the long-term alleviation of poverty and other social problems. I argue that the implications of this “lack of government responsiveness argument” (or LOGRA) are both broader and narrower than they might (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22. Putting a Number on the Harm of Death.Joseph Millum - 2019 - In Espen Gamlund & Carl Tollef Solberg (eds.), Saving People from the Harm of Death. Oxford University Press. pp. 61-75.
    Donors to global health programs and policymakers within national health systems have to make difficult decisions about how to allocate scarce health care resources. Principled ways to make these decisions all make some use of summary measures of health, which provide a common measure of the value (or disvalue) of morbidity and mortality. They thereby allow comparisons between health interventions with different effects on the patterns of death and ill health within a population. The construction of a summary measure of (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Considering Quality of Life While Repudiating Disability Injustice: A Pathways Approach to Setting Priorities.Govind Persad - 2019 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 47 (2):294-303.
    This article proposes a novel strategy, one that draws on insights from antidiscrimination law, for addressing a persistent challenge in medical ethics and the philosophy of disability: whether health systems can consider quality of life without unjustly discriminating against individuals with disabilities. It argues that rather than uniformly considering or ignoring quality of life, health systems should take a more nuanced approach. Under the article's proposal, health systems should treat cases where quality of life suffers because of disability-focused exclusion or (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  24. Transparency Trade-Offs: Priority Setting, Scarcity, and Health Fairness.Govind Persad - 2019 - In I. Glenn Cohen, Barbara Evans, Holly Lynch & Carmel Shachar (eds.), Transparency in Health and Health Care. New York: Cambridge UP.
    This chapter argues that rather than viewing transparency as a right, we should regard it as a finite resource whose allocation involves tradeoffs. It then argues that those tradeoffs should be resolved by using a multi-principle approach to distributive justice. The relevant principles include maximizing welfare, maximizing autonomy, and giving priority to the worst off. Finally, it examines some of the implications for law of recognizing the tradeoffs presented by transparency proposals.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Will More Organs Save More Lives? Cost‐Effectiveness and the Ethics of Expanding Organ Procurement.Govind Persad - 2019 - Bioethics 33 (6):684-690.
    The assumption that procuring more organs will save more lives has inspired increasingly forceful calls to increase organ procurement. This project, in contrast, directly questions the premise that more organ transplantation means more lives saved. Its argument begins with the fact that resources are limited and medical procedures have opportunity costs. Because many other lifesaving interventions are more cost‐effective than transplantation and compete with transplantation for a limited budget, spending on organ transplantation consumes resources that could have been used to (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. Which Values Should Be Built Into Economic Measures?S. Andrew Schroeder - 2019 - Economics and Philosophy 35 (3):521-536.
    Many economic measures are structured to reflect ethical values. I describe three attitudes towards this: maximalism, according to which we should aim to build all relevant values into measures; minimalism, according to which we should aim to keep values out of measures; and an intermediate view. I argue the intermediate view is likely correct, but existing versions are inadequate. In particular, economists have strong reason to structure measures to reflect fixed, as opposed to user-assessable, values. This implies that, despite disagreement (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  27. Health(Care) and the Temporal Subject.Ben Davies - 2018 - Les Ateliers de l'Éthique / the Ethics Forum 13 (3):38-64.
    Many assume that theories of distributive justice must obviously take people’s lifetimes, and only their lifetimes, as the relevant period across which we distribute. Although the question of the temporal subject has risen in prominence, it is still relatively underdeveloped, particularly in the sphere of health and healthcare. This paper defends a particular view, “momentary sufficientarianism,” as being an important element of healthcare justice. At the heart of the argument is a commitment to pluralism about justice, where theorizing about just (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  28. Balancing Small Against Large Burdens.Alex Voorhoeve - 2018 - Behavioural Public Policy 2 (1):125-142.
    Common principles for resource allocation in health care can prioritize the alleviation of small health burdens over lifesaving treatment. I argue that there is some evidence that these principles are at odds with a sizable share of public opinion, which holds that saving a life should take priority over any number of cures for minor ailments. I propose two possible explanations for this opinion, one debunking and one vindicatory. I also outline how well-designed surveys and moral inquiry could help decide (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  29. Pharmacogenomic Inequalities: Strategies for Justice in Biomedical Research and Healthcare.Giovanni De Grandis - 2017 - Diametros 51:153-172.
    The paper discusses the possibility that the benefits of pharmacogenomics will not be distributed equally and will create orphan populations. I argue that since these inequalities are not substantially different from those produced by ‘traditional’ drugs and are not generated with the intention to discriminate, their production needs not be unethical. Still, the final result is going against deep-seated moral feelings and intuitions, as well as broadly accepted principles of just distribution of health outcomes and healthcare. I thus propose two (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  30. Dilemmas in Access to Medicines: A Humanitarian Perspective – Authors' Reply.Ezekiel J. Emanuel & Govind Persad - 2017 - Lancet 387 (10073):1008-1009.
    Our Viewpoint argues that expanding access to less effective or more toxic treatments is supported not only by utilitarian ethical reasoning but also by two other ethical frameworks: those that emphasise equality and those that emphasise giving priority to the patients who are worst off. The inadequate resources available for global health reflect not only natural constraints but also unwise social and political choices. However, pitting efforts to reduce inequality and better fund global health against efforts to put available resources (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  31. How to Allocate Scarce Health Resources Without Discriminating Against People with Disabilities.Tyler M. John, Joseph Millum & David Wasserman - 2017 - Economics and Philosophy 33 (2):161-186.
    One widely used method for allocating health care resources involves the use of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to rank treatments in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. CEA has been criticized for discriminating against people with disabilities by valuing their lives less than those of non-disabled people. Avoiding discrimination seems to lead to the ’QALY trap’: we cannot value saving lives equally and still value raising quality of life. This paper reviews existing responses to the QALY trap and argues that all (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  32. Resource Allocation, Treatment, Disclosure, and Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques: Some Comments on de Melo-Martin and Harris.César Palacios-gonzález - 2017 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 26 (2):278-287.
    Some Comments on de Melo-Martin and Harris.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  33. Public Preferences About Fairness and the Ethics of Allocating Scarce Medical Interventions.Govind Persad - 2017 - In Meng Li & David Tracer (eds.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Fairness, Equity, and Justice. pp. 51-65.
    This chapter examines how social- scientific research on public preferences bears on the ethical question of how those resources should in fact be allocated, and explain how social-scientific researchers might find an understanding of work in ethics useful as they design mechanisms for data collection and analysis. I proceed by first distinguishing the methodologies of social science and ethics. I then provide an overview of different approaches to the ethics of allocating scarce medical interventions, including an approach—the complete lives system—which (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. Why One Should Count Only Claims with Which One Can Sympathize.Alex Voorhoeve - 2017 - Public Health Ethics 10 (2):148-156.
    When one faces competing claims of varying strength on public resources for health, which claims count? This paper proposes the following answer. One should count, or aggregate, a person’s claim just in case one could sympathize with her desire to prioritize her own claim over the strongest competing claim. It argues that this principle yields appealing case judgments and has a plausible grounding in both sympathetic identification with each person, taken separately, and respect for the person for whom most is (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  35. Are Indirect Benefits Relevant to Health Care Allocation Decisions?Jessica Du Toit & Joseph Millum - 2016 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 41 (5):540-557.
    When allocating scarce healthcare resources, the expected benefits of alternative allocations matter. But, there are different kinds of benefits. Some are direct benefits to the recipient of the resource such as the health improvements of receiving treatment. Others are indirect benefits to third parties such as the economic gains from having a healthier workforce. This article considers whether only the direct benefits of alternative healthcare resource allocations are relevant to allocation decisions, or whether indirect benefits are relevant too. First, we (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  36. Calibrating QALYs to Respect Equality of Persons.Donald Franklin - 2016 - Utilitas 29 (1):1-23.
    Comparative valuation of different policy interventions often requires interpersonal comparability of benefit. In the field of health economics, the metric commonly used for such comparison, quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, has been criticized for failing to respect the equality of all persons’ intrinsic worth, including particularly those with disabilities. A methodology is proposed that interprets ‘full quality of life’ as the best health prospect that is achievable for the particular individual within the relevant budget constraint. This calibration is challenging (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  37. Health Inequalities and Relational Egalitarianism.J. Paul Kelleher - 2016 - In Rebecca L. Walker Mara Buchbinder & Michele Rivkin-Fish (eds.), Understanding Health Inequalities and Justice: New Conversations across the Disciplines. University of North Carolina Press.
    Much of the philosophical literature on health inequalities seeks to establish the superiority of one or another conception of luck egalitarianism. In recent years, however, an increasing number of self-avowed egalitarian philosophers have proposed replacing luck egalitarianism with alternatives that stress the moral relevance of distinct relationships, rather than the moral relevance of good or bad luck. After briefly explaining why I am not attracted to luck egalitarianism, I seek in this chapter to distinguish and clarify three views that have (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  38. Should Research Ethics Encourage the Production of Cost-Effective Interventions?Govind Persad - 2016 - In Daniel Strech & Marcel Mertz (eds.), Ethics and Governance of Biomedical Research: Theory and Practice. Springer. pp. 13-28.
    This project considers whether and how research ethics can contribute to the provision of cost-effective medical interventions. Clinical research ethics represents an underexplored context for the promotion of cost-effectiveness. In particular, although scholars have recently argued that research on less-expensive, less-effective interventions can be ethical, there has been little or no discussion of whether ethical considerations justify curtailing research on more expensive, more effective interventions. Yet considering cost-effectiveness at the research stage can help ensure that scarce resources such as tissue (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39. Expanding Deliberation in Critical-Care Policy Design.Govind C. Persad - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (1):60-63.
    In this commentary, I suggest expanding the deliberative aspects of critical care policy development in two ways. First, critical-care policy development should expand the scope of deliberation by leaving fewer issues up to expertise or private choice. For instance. it should allow deliberation about the relevance of age, disability, social position, and psychological well-being to allocation decisions. Second, it should broaden both the set of costs considered and the set of stakeholders represented in the deliberative process. In particular, it should (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  40. The Ethics of Expanding Access to Cheaper, Less Effective Treatments.Govind C. Persad & Ezekiel J. Emanuel - 2016 - The Lancet:S0140-6736(15)01025-9.
    This article examines a fundamental question of justice in global health. Is it ethically preferable to provide a larger number of people with cheaper treatments that are less effective (or more toxic), or to restrict treatments to a smaller group to provide a more expensive but more effective or less toxic alternative? We argue that choosing to provide less effective or more toxic interventions to a larger number of people is favored by the principles of utility, equality, and priority for (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  41. Sufficiency, Comprehensiveness of Health Care Coverage, and Cost-Sharing Arrangements in the Realpolitik of Health Policy.Govind Persad & Harald Schmidt - 2016 - In Carina Fourie & Annette Rid (eds.), What is Enough?: Sufficiency, Justice, and Health. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 267-280.
    This chapter explores two questions in detail: How should we determine the threshold for costs that individuals are asked to bear through insurance premiums or care-related out-of-pocket costs, including user fees and copayments? and What is an adequate relationship between costs and benefits? This chapter argues that preventing impoverishment is a morally more urgent priority than protecting households against income fluctuations, and that many health insurance plans may not adequately protect individuals from health care costs that threaten to drop their (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. Identifying Objects of Value at the End of Life.Christopher James Sampson - 2016 - In Jeff Round (ed.), Care at the End of Life: An Economic Perspective. Adis. pp. 103-122.
    End-of-life care has a number of characteristics that make economic evaluation particularly challenging. These include proximity to death, the improbability of survival gain, individuals’ changing priorities, declining cognition and effects on close persons. In view of these particularities of end-of-life care, some researchers have determined that current ‘extra-welfarist’ approaches to defining do not adequately reflect well-being. As a result, suggestions are being made that would see the QALY approach either replaced or subject to significant redefinition. The purported goal of adopting (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43. Priority Setting, Cost-Effectiveness, and the Affordable Care Act.Govind Persad - 2015 - American Journal of Law and Medicine 41 (1):119-166.
    The Affordable Care Act (ACA) may be the most important health law statute in American history, yet much of the most prominent legal scholarship examining it has focused on the merits of the court challenges it has faced rather than delving into the details of its priority-setting provisions. In addition to providing an overview of the ACA’s provisions concerning priority setting and their developing interpretations, this Article attempts to defend three substantive propositions. First, I argue that the ACA is neither (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  44. Stillbirth Should Be Given Greater Priority on the Global Health Agenda.Zeshan U. Qureshi, Joseph Millum, Hannah Blencowe, Maureen Kelley, Joy E. Lawn, Anthony Costello & Tim Colbourn - 2015 - British Medical Journal 351:h4620.
    Stillbirths are largely excluded from international measures of mortality and morbidity. Zeshan Qureshi and colleagues argue that stillbirth should be higher on the global health agenda.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45. The Post-2015 Development Agenda: Keeping Our Focus On the Worst Off.D. Sharp - 2015 - American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 92 (6):1087-89.
    Non-communicable diseases now account for the majority of the global burden of disease and an international campaign has emerged to raise their priority on the post-2015 development agenda. We argue, to the contrary, that there remain strong reasons to prioritize maternal and child health. Policy-makers ought to assign highest priority to the health conditions that afflict the worst off. In virtue of how little healthy life they have had, children who die young are among the globally worst off. Moreover, many (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  46. How (Not) to Argue for the Rule of Rescue. Claims of Individuals Versus Group Solidarity.Marcel Verweij - 2015 - In Gohen Glen, Daniels Norman & Eyal Nir (eds.), Identified versus Statistical Victims. An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Oxford University Press. pp. 137-149.
    The rule of rescue holds that special weight should be given to protecting the lives of assignable individuals in need, implying that less weight is given to considerations of cost-effectiveness. This is sometimes invoked as an argument for funding or reimbursing life-saving treatment in public healthcare even if the costs of such treatment are extreme. At first sight one might assume that an individualist approach to ethics—such as Scanlon’s contractualism—would offer a promising route to justification of the rule of rescue. (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  47. Why Sore Throats Don't Aggregate Against a Life, but Arms Do.Alex Voorhoeve - 2015 - Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (6):492-493.
    When do claims to be saved of a small or moderate harm aggregate against a competing claim to be saved from an early death? In this short response to Kamm's Bioethical Prescriptions, I argue for the following answer: aggregation of weaker claims against a life is permitted just in case, in a one-to-one contest, a person with a weaker claim would have a personal prerogative to prioritize her claim over a stranger’s competing claim to life.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48. Making Fair Choices on the Path to Universal Health Coverage.Ole Frithjof Norheim, Trygve Ottersen, Bona Chitah, Richard Cookson, Norman Daniels, Nir Eyal, Walter Flores, Axel Gosseries, Daniel Hausman, Samia Hurst, Lydia Kapiriri, Toby Ord, Shlomi Segall, Frehiwot Defaye, Alex Voorhoeve & Alicia Yamin - 2014 - World Health Organisation.
    This report by the WHO Consultative Group on Equity and Universal Health Coverage addresses how countries can make fair progress towards the goal of universal coverage. It explains the relevant tradeoffs between different desirable ends and offers guidance on how to make these tradeoffs.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  49. Human Enhancement: A New Issue in Philosophical Agenda.Marco Azevedo - 2013 - Princípios. Revista de Filosofía 20 (33):265-303.
    Since before we can remember, humanity aims to overcome its biological limitations; such a goal has certainly played a key role in the advent of technique. However, despite the benefits that technique may bring, the people who make use of it will inevitably be under risk of harm. Even though human technical wisdom consists in attaining the best result without compromising anybody’s safety, misuses are always a possibility in the horizon. Nowadays, technology can be used for more than just improving (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50. Biotechnology, Justice and Health.Ruth Faden & Madison Powers - 2013 - Journal of Practical Ethics 1 (1):49-61.
    New biotechnologies have the potential to both dramatically improve human well-being and dramatically widen inequalities in well-being. This paper addresses a question that lies squarely on the fault line of these two claims: When as a matter of justice are societies obligated to include a new biotechnology in a national healthcare system? This question is approached from the standpoint of a twin aim theory of justice, in which social structures, including nation-states, have double-barreled theoretical objectives with regard to human well-being. (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
1 — 50 / 63