Contents
96 found
Order:
1 — 50 / 96
  1. Fair Allocation of GLP-1 and Dual GLP-1-GIP Receptor Agonists.Ezekiel J. Emanuel, Johan L. Dellgren, Matthew S. McCoy & Govind Persad - forthcoming - New England Journal of Medicine.
    Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, such as semaglutide, and dual GLP-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) receptor agonists, such as tirzepatide, have been found to be effective for treating obesity and diabetes, significantly reducing weight and the risk or predicted risk of adverse cardiovascular events. There is a global shortage of these medications that could last several years and raises questions about how limited supplies should be allocated. We propose a fair-allocation framework that enables evaluation of the ethics of current (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Manufactured scarcity and the allocation of scarce resources–Authors' reply.Ezekiel J. Emanuel & Govind Persad - 2024 - The Lancet 403 (10426):532.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Healthcare Priorities: The “Young” and the “Old”.Ben Davies - 2023 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 32 (2):174-185.
    Some philosophers and segments of the public think age is relevant to healthcare priority-setting. One argument for this is based in equity: “Old” patients have had either more of a relevant good than “young” patients or enough of that good and so have weaker claims to treatment. This article first notes that some discussions of age-based priority that focus in this way on old and young patients exhibit an ambiguity between two claims: that patients classified as old should have a (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Medical need and health need.Ben Davies - 2023 - Clinical Ethics 18 (3):287-291.
    I introduce a distinction between health need and medical need, and raise several questions about their interaction. Health needs are needs that relate directly to our health condition. Medical needs are needs which bear some relation to medical institutions or processes. I suggest that the question of whether medical insurance or public care should cover medical needs, health needs, or only needs which fit both categories is a political question that cannot be resolved definitionally. I also argue against an overly (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5. Allocation of Scarce Life-Saving Medical Resources: Why Does Age Matter?Felipe Dossena & Milene Tonetto - 2023 - Ethic@ - An International Journal for Moral Philosophy 22 (3):1111-1128.
    In this paper, we address the moral justification problem concerning the use of age as a criterion for the allocation of scarce life-saving medical resources. We present and discuss four justifications that stand out in philosophical literature: efficiency, sufficiency, egalitarian, and prioritarian. We aim to demonstrate that all these justifications are unsatisfactory since they entail counterintuitive implications in cases involving fetuses and newborns. We then suggest another justification for the relevance of age based on the Time-Relative Interest Account of the (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. The shared ethical framework to allocate scarce medical resources: a lesson from COVID-19.Ezekiel J. Emanuel & Govind Persad - 2023 - The Lancet 401 (10391):1892–1902.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has helped to clarify the fair and equitable allocation of scarce medical resources, both within and among countries. The ethical allocation of such resources entails a three-step process: (1) elucidating the fundamental ethical values for allocation, (2) using these values to delineate priority tiers for scarce resources, and (3) implementing the prioritisation to faithfully realise the fundamental values. Myriad reports and assessments have elucidated five core substantive values for ethical allocation: maximising benefits and minimising harms, mitigating unfair (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Fair domestic allocation of monkeypox virus countermeasures.Govind Persad, R. J. Leland, Trygve Ottersen, Henry S. Richardson, Carla Saenz, G. Owen Schaefer & Ezekiel J. Emanuel - 2023 - Lancet Public Health 8 (5):e378–e382.
    Countermeasures for mpox (formerly known as monkeypox), primarily vaccines, have been in limited supply in many countries during outbreaks. Equitable allocation of scarce resources during public health emergencies is a complex challenge. Identifying the objectives and core values for the allocation of mpox countermeasures, using those values to provide guidance for priority groups and prioritisation tiers, and optimising allocation implementation are important. The fundamental values for the allocation of mpox countermeasures are: preventing death and illness; reducing the association between death (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. Clarifying the Discussion on Prioritization and Discrimination in Healthcare.Joona Räsänen - 2023 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 32 (2):139-140.
    Discrimination is an important real-life issue that affects many individuals and groups. It is also a fruitful field of study that intersects several disciplines and methods. This Special Section brings together papers on discrimination and prioritization in healthcare from leading scholars in bioethics and closely related fields.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. Involuntary Withdrawal: A Bridge Too Far?Joanna Smolenski - 2023 - Clinical Ethics Case Studies, Hastings Bioethics Forum.
    RD, a 32-year-old male, was admitted to the hospital with hypoxic COVID pneumonia–a potentially life-threatening condition characterized by dangerously low levels of oxygen in the body- during one of the pandemic’s surges. While RD’s age gave the clinical team hope for his prognosis, his ability to recover was complicated by his being unvaccinated and having multiple comorbidities, including diabetes and obesity. His condition worsened to the point that he required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), a machine that maintains the functioning of (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. Voluntariness or legal obligation? An ethical analysis of two instruments for fairer global access to COVID-19 vaccines.Katja Voit, Cristian Timmermann, Marcin Orzechowski & Florian Steger - 2023 - Frontiers in Public Health 11:995683.
    Introduction: There is currently no binding, internationally accepted and successful approach to ensure global equitable access to healthcare during a pandemic. The aim of this ethical analysis is to bring into the discussion a legally regulated vaccine allocation as a possible strategy for equitable global access to vaccines. We focus our analysis on COVAX (COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access) and an existing EU regulation that, after adjustment, could promote global vaccine allocation. -/- Methods: The main documents discussing the two strategies are (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. The Prospects for ‘Prospect Utilitarianism’.Ben Davies - 2022 - Utilitas 34 (3):335-343.
    Hun Chung argues for a theory of distributive justice – ‘prospect utilitarianism’ – that overcomes two central problems purportedly faced by sufficientarianism: giving implausible answers in ‘lifeboat cases’, where we can save the lives of some but not all of a group, and failing to respect the axiom of continuity. Chung claims that prospect utilitarianism overcomes these problems, and receives empirical support from work in economics on prospect theory. This article responds to Chung's criticisms of sufficientarianism, showing that they are (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. Is regulatory innovation fit for purpose? A case study of adaptive regulation for advanced biotherapeutics.Giovanni De Grandis - 2022 - Regulation and Governance 16.
    The need to better balance the promotion of scientific and technological innovation with risk management for consumer protection has inspired several recent reforms attempting to make regulations more flexible and adaptive. The pharmaceutical sector has a long, established regulatory tradition, as well as a long history of controversies around how to balance incentives for needed therapeutic innovations and protecting patient safety. The emergence of disruptive biotechnologies has provided the occasion for regulatory innovation in this sector. This article investigates the regulation (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. Existing Ethical Tensions in Xenotransplantation.L. Syd M. Johnson - 2022 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 31 (3):355-367.
    The genetic modification of pigs as a source of transplantable organs is one of several possible solutions to the chronic organ shortage. This paper describes existing ethical tensions in xenotransplantation (XTx) that argue against pursuing it. Recommendations for lifelong infectious disease surveillance and notification of close contacts of recipients are in tension with the rights of human research subjects. Parental/guardian consent for pediatric xenograft recipients is in tension with a child’s right to an open future. Individual consent to transplant is (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  14. COVID-19 Vaccine Refusal and Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources.Govind Persad & Emily A. Largent - 2022 - JAMA Health Forum 3 (4):e220356.
    When hospitals face surges of patients with COVID-19, fair allocation of scarce medical resources remains a challenge. Scarcity has at times encompassed not only hospital and intensive care unit beds—often reflecting staffing shortages—but also therapies and intensive treatments. Safe, highly effective COVID-19 vaccines have been free and widely available since mid-2021, yet many Americans remain unvaccinated by choice. Should their decision to forgo vaccination be considered when allocating scarce resources? Some have suggested it should, while others disagree. We offer a (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15. Why we should stop using animal-derived products on patients without their consent.Daniel Rodger - 2022 - Journal of Medical Ethics 48 (10):702-706.
    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. First, I argue that using animal-derived medical products on patients without their informed consent undermines respect for their autonomy. Second, it risks causing nontrivial psychological harm. Third, it is morally inconsistent to respect (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  16. COVID-19 vaccine boosters for all adults: An optimal U.s. approach?Ameet Sarpatwari, Ankur Pandya, Emily P. Hyle & Govind Persad - 2022 - Annals of Internal Medicine 175 (2):280-282.
    By 20 October 2021, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had amended its Emergency Use Authorizations for immunocompetent adults who previously received the Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccines. For the 2-dose Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, the FDA permitted a single booster dose for adults aged 65 years or older and adults aged 18 to 64 years at high-risk for severe COVID-19 or at high risk for occupational or institutional COVID-19 exposure. For the single-dose Johnson & Johnson (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  17. Dose optimisation and scarce resource allocation: two sides of the same coin.Garth Strohbehn, Govind Persad, William F. Parker & Srinivas Murthy - 2022 - BMJ Open 12 (10):e063436.
    Objective: A deep understanding of the relationship between a scarce drug's dose and clinical response is necessary to appropriately distribute a supply-constrained drug along these lines. Summary of key data: The vast majority of drug development and repurposing during the COVID-19 pandemic – an event that has made clear the ever-present scarcity in healthcare systems –has been ignorant of scarcity and dose optimisation's ability to help address it. Conclusions: Future pandemic clinical trials systems should obtain dose optimisation data, as these (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. A Multicenter Weighted Lottery to Equitably Allocate Scarce COVID-19 Therapeutics.D. B. White, E. K. McCreary, C. H. Chang, M. Schmidhofer, J. R. Bariola, N. N. Jonassaint, Parag A. Pathak, G. Persad, R. D. Truog, T. Sonmez & M. Utku Unver - 2022 - American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 206 (4):503–506.
    Shortages of new therapeutics to treat coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have forced clinicians, public health officials, and health systems to grapple with difficult questions about how to fairly allocate potentially life-saving treatments when there are not enough for all patients in need (1). Shortages have occurred with remdesivir, tocilizumab, monoclonal antibodies, and the oral antiviral Paxlovid (2) -/- Ensuring equitable allocation is especially important in light of the disproportionate burden experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic by disadvantaged groups, including Black, Hispanic/Latino and (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Value choices in European COVID-19 vaccination schedules: how vaccination prioritization differs from other forms of priority setting.Karolina Wiśniowska, Tomasz Żuradzki & Wojciech Ciszewski - 2022 - Journal of Law and the Biosciences 9 (2):lsac026.
    With the limited initial availability of COVID-19 vaccines in the first months of 2021, decision-makers had to determine the order in which different groups were prioritized. Our aim was to find out what normative approaches to the allocation of scarce preventive resources were embedded in the national COVID-19 vaccination schedules. We systematically reviewed and compared prioritization regulations in 27 members of the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Israel. We differentiated between two types of priority categories: groups that have increased (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. How the past matters for the future: a luck egalitarian sustainability principle for healthcare resource allocation.Andreas Albertsen - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (2):102-103.
    Christian Munthe, David Fumagalli and Erik Malmqvist argue that well-known healthcare resource allocation principles, such as need, prognosis, equal treatment and cost-effectiveness, should be supplemented with a principle of sustainability.1 Employing such a principle would entail that the allocation of healthcare resources should take into account whether a specific allocation causes negative dynamics, which would limit the amount of resources available in the future. As examples of allocation decisions, which may have such negative dynamics, they mention those who cause a (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  21. Responsibility and the recursion problem.Ben Davies - 2021 - Ratio 35 (2):112-122.
    A considerable literature has emerged around the idea of using ‘personal responsibility’ as an allocation criterion in healthcare distribution, where a person's being suitably responsible for their health needs may justify additional conditions on receiving healthcare, and perhaps even limiting access entirely, sometimes known as ‘responsibilisation’. This discussion focuses most prominently, but not exclusively, on ‘luck egalitarianism’, the view that deviations from equality are justified only by suitably free choices. A superficially separate issue in distributive justice concerns the two–way relationship (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  22. ‘Personal Health Surveillance’: The Use of mHealth in Healthcare Responsibilisation.Ben Davies - 2021 - Public Health Ethics 14 (3):268-280.
    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 citations  
  23. Priority, Ethical Principle, and Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources. Di Wu - 2021 - Studies in Dialectics of Nature 11 (37):62-68.
    Aiming at the allocation of scarce medical resources, Immanuel and other scholars have put forward a set of influential ethical values and guiding principles. It assigns the priority of resource allocation to those whose lives can be saved and maximized, those who can bring the greatest instrumental value, and those who are the worse off. For other members of society, random selection under the same conditions is adopted. Following the Rawlsian "lexical order, lexicographical" rule, this priority arrangement requires that the (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24. What are the obligations of pharmaceutical companies in a global health emergency?Ezekiel J. Emanuel, Allen Buchanan, Shuk Ying Chan, Cécile Fabre, Daniel Halliday, Joseph Heath, Lisa Herzog, R. J. Leland, Matthew S. McCoy, Ole F. Norheim, Carla Saenz, G. Owen Schaefer, Kok-Chor Tan, Christopher Heath Wellman, Jonathan Wolff & Govind Persad - 2021 - Lancet 398 (10304):1015.
    All parties involved in researching, developing, manufacturing, and distributing COVID-19 vaccines need guidance on their ethical obligations. We focus on pharmaceutical companies' obligations because their capacities to research, develop, manufacture, and distribute vaccines make them uniquely placed for stemming the pandemic. We argue that an ethical approach to COVID-19 vaccine production and distribution should satisfy four uncontroversial principles: optimising vaccine production, including development, testing, and manufacturing; fair distribution; sustainability; and accountability. All parties' obligations should be coordinated and mutually consistent. For (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  25. Obligations in a global health emergency - Authors’ reply.Ezekiel Emanuel, Cecile Fabre, Lisa M. Herzog, Ole F. Norheim, Govind Persad, G. Owen Schaefer & Kok-Chor Tan - 2021 - Lancet 398 (10316):2072.
    In response to commentators, we argue that whether waiving patent rights will meaningfully improve access to COVID-19 vaccines for low income and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly in the short term, is an empirical matter. We also reject preferentially allocating vaccines to countries that hosted trials because doing so unethically favours those with research infrastructure, rather than those facing the worst burdens from COVID-19.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. Love thy neighbour? Allocating vaccines in a world of competing obligations.Kyle Ferguson & Arthur Caplan - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (12):e20-e20.
    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   3 citations  
  27. 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  
  28. 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   8 citations  
  29. Against Exclusive Survivalism: Preventing Lost Life and Protecting the Disadvantaged in Resource Allocation.Govind Persad - 2021 - Hastings Center Report 51 (5):47-51.
    When life-saving medical resources are scarce and not everyone can be saved, is the only relevant goal saving the most lives? Or can other factors be considered, at least as tiebreakers, such as how early in life the people we don't save will die or how much future life they are likely to lose? This commentary defends a multiprinciple allocation approach that considers objectives in addition to saving more lives, including preventing early death and preventing harm in the form of (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. Fair allocation of scarce therapies for COVID-19.Govind Persad, Monica E. Peek & Seema K. Shah - 2021 - Clinical Infectious Diseases 18:ciab1039.
    The U.S. FDA has issued emergency use authorizations for monoclonal antibodies for non-hospitalized patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 disease and for individuals exposed to COVID-19 as post-exposure prophylaxis. One EUA for an oral antiviral drug, molnupiravir, has also been recommended by FDA’s Antimicrobial Drugs Advisory Committee, and others appear likely in the near future. Due to increased demand because of the Delta variant, the federal government resumed control over the supply and asked states to ration doses. As future variants (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. 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  
  32. The Complex Relationship Between Disability Discrimination and Frailty Scoring.Joel Michael Reynolds, Charles E. Binkley & Andrew Shuman - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (11):74-76.
    In "Frailty Triage: Is Rationing Intensive Medical Treatment on the Grounds of Frailty Ethical?," Wilkinson (2021) argues that the use of frailty scores in ICU triage does not necessarily involve discrimination on the basis of disability. In support of this argument, he claims, “it is not the disability per se that the score is measuring – rather it is the underlying physiological and physical vulnerability." While we appreciate the attention Wilkinson explicitly pays to disability in this piece, we find the (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  33. Should Pediatric Patients Be Prioritized When Rationing Life-Saving Treatments During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Ryan M. Antiel, Farr A. Curlin, Govind Persad, Douglas B. White, Cathy Zhang, Aaron Glickman, Ezekiel J. Emanuel & John Lantos - 2020 - Pediatrics 146 (3):e2020012542.
    Coronavirus disease 2019 can lead to respiratory failure. Some patients require extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. During the current pandemic, health care resources in some cities have been overwhelmed, and doctors have faced complex decisions about resource allocation. We present a case in which a pediatric hospital caring for both children and adults seeks to establish guidelines for the use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation if there are not enough resources to treat every patient. Experts in critical care, end-of-life care, bioethics, and (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  34. 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   5 citations  
  35. 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   1 citation  
  36. 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   4 citations  
  37. 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   12 citations  
  38. 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   9 citations  
  39. 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  
  40. 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   9 citations  
  41. 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   3 citations  
  42. 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   3 citations  
  43. 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 (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   1 citation  
  44. 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  
  45. 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  
  46. 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  
  47. 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. New York: 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   1 citation  
  48. 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  
  49. 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  
  50. Cost-Effectiveness in Animal Health: An Ethical Analysis.Govind Persad - 2019 - In Bob Fischer (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Animal Ethics. New York: Routledge.
    -/- This chapter evaluates the ethical issues that using cost-effectiveness considerations to set animal health priorities might present, and its conclusions are cautiously optimistic. While using cost-effectiveness calculations in animal health is not without ethical pitfalls, these calculations offer a pathway toward more rigorous priority-setting efforts that allow money spent on animal well-being to do more good. Although assessing quality of life for animals may be more challenging than in humans, implementing prioritization based on cost-effectiveness is less ethically fraught.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 96