Definition of the problem Obesity is a burgeoning challenge for healthcare systems worldwide. In times of demographic change, it also affects an increasing number of older persons, presenting substantial challenges to delivering health and nursing care in both acute and long-term care (LTC) settings. So far, a detailed analysis of the diverse group of 65+ in this field is missing, particularly in the area of LTC. The needs of neither care recipients, nor those of nurses and institutions are monitored, analyzed, (...) or systematically evaluated. Moreover, ethical implications of professional care for older persons with obesity have not yet been discussed in research and policy. Arguments We argue that a needs-based approach is appropriate to address these ethical complexities. We further argue that a comprehensive mapping of the ethical terrain is best from an interdisciplinary and mixed methods perspective. For this, we conduct a scoping review to synthesize the state-of-the-art in both the healthcare and LTC settings; and we focus on challenges reported in case studies from professional care settings in European and North American institutions. Conclusion Our findings point to a lack of research on ethical issues related to the LTC needs of older persons living with obesity and the challenges faced by their professional carers. From the limited number of (case) studies that can be found, however, a series of ethical concerns emerge that have direct import for access, utilization, and quality of care. Accordingly, a new research agenda is needed to inform an ethical approach for policy and practice. It must be rooted in a concern for both care recipients and caregivers in mixed methods studies. Future research should provide criteria for balancing needs, allocating resources and developing practical solutions for people who are confronted with multiple stigma. (shrink)

Principles of need are constantly referred to in health care priority setting. The common denominator for any principle of need is that it will ascribe some kind of special normative weight to people being worse off. However, this common ground does not answer the question how a plausible principle of need should relate to the aggregation of benefits across individuals. Principles of need are sometimes stated as being incompatible with aggregation and sometimes characterized as accepting aggregation in much the same (...) way as utilitarians do. In this paper we argue that if one wants to take principles of need seriously both of these positions have unreasonable implications. We then characterize and defend a principle of need consisting of sufficientarian elements as well as prioritarian which avoids these unreasonable implications. (shrink)

Policy decisions regarding immunization during a pandemic are informed by the ethical understandings of policy makers. With the possibility that a vaccine might soon be available to mitigate the deadly COVID-19 pandemic, policy makers can consider learnings from past pandemic immunization campaigns. This critical analysis of three policy decisions made in Alberta, Canada, during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic demonstrates the predominance of distributive justice principles and the problems that this created for vulnerable groups. Vulnerable groups identified in Alberta include (...) rural and First Nations populations. We propose a social justice approach as a viable alternative to inform pandemic immunization policy and invite debate. (shrink)

Instrumentalists about need believe that all needs are instrumental, i.e., ontologically dependent upon ends, goals or purposes. Absolutists view some needs as non-instrumental. The aims of this article are: clearly to characterize the instrumentalism/absolutism debate that is of concern (mainly §1); to establish that both positions have recent and current adherents (mainly §1); to bring what is, in comparison with prior literature, a relatively high level of precision to the debate, employing some hitherto neglected, but important, insights (passim); to show, (...) on grounds not previously to the fore in the literature, that insofar as instrumentalism’s advocates have provided arguments for the position, these are unsound (§2); to argue against instrumentalism using a new dilemma concerning whether ‘end’, ‘goal’ and ‘purpose’ are interpreted in a mentalistic manner (§3); to elucidate the implications of the needs/need-satisfiers and preconditions/means distinctions for the debate (§4). (shrink)

The principle of need—the idea that resources should be allocated according to need—is often invoked in priority setting in the health care sector. In this article, I argue that a reasonable principle of need must be indeterminate, and examine three different ways that this can be dealt with: appendicizing the principle with further principles, imposing determinacy, or empowering decision makers. I argue that need must be conceptualized as a composite property composed of at least two factors: health shortfall and capacity (...) to benefit. When one examines how the different factors relate to each other, one discovers that this is sometimes indeterminate. I illustrate this indeterminacy in this article by applying the small improvement argument. If the relation between the factors are always determinate, the comparative relation changes by a small adjustment. Yet, if two needs are dissimilar but of seemingly equal magnitude, the comparative relation does not change by a small adjustment of one of the factors. I then outline arguments in favor of each of the three strategies for dealing with indeterminacy, but also point out that all strategies have significant shortcomings. More research is needed concerning how to deal with this indeterminacy, and the most promising path seems to be to scrutinize the position of the principle of need among a plurality of relevant principles for priority setting in the health care sector. (shrink)

Definition of the problem In Germany, there is currently a significant gap in the care of persons affected by obesity due to the absence of a standardized therapy path, regional variations in health services, and case-by-case decisions for approval. This situation prompts the discussion of integrating digital obesity applications into the existing care framework. Arguments The analysis presents an ethical reflection on the use of digital health applications for obesity treatment, examining their suitability for this complex chronic condition, which has (...) multifactorial causes and a heterogeneous patient group. We evaluate the social, advisory, and organizational aspects required to meet the diverse needs of those affected. The study highlights key ethical challenges such as avoiding stigmatization and discrimination, acknowledging the diversity of patient groups, and integrating holistic therapeutic approaches. The article also emphasizes the importance of participatory research methods to incorporate the perspectives and experiences of patients systematically. Conclusion Digital health applications hold potential to significantly improve obesity care in Germany, especially in regions with limited access to traditional therapy options. Successful implementation, however, requires careful ethical reflection and empirical research. It is crucial that these applications address the diversity and complexity of the patient population and their specific needs, which will contribute to a reduction of the care gap. (shrink)

Kerstein and Bognar (2010) and Persad, Wertheimer, and Emanuel (2009) defend specific principles for the allocation of health care resources, but their choice of principles is influenced by the exa...

What challenges must a principle of need for prioritisations in health care meet in order to be plausible and practically useful? Some progress in answering this question has recently been made by Hope, Østerdal and Hasman. This article continue their work by suggesting that the characteristic feature of principles of needs is that they are sufficientarian, saying that we have a right to a minimally acceptable or good life or health, but nothing more. Accordingly, principles of needs must answer two (...) distributive questions: when do we have sufficient and how should we prioritise among those who do not yet have a sufficiency? Furthermore, it is argued that Roger Crisp’s theory of need, which combines sufficientarianism with prioritarianism below the threshold of need, is better equipped than alternatives to answer these questions as well as meeting the challenges formulated by Hope, Østerdal and Hasman. However, Crisp’s theory faces two major challenges. First, it has to say something about the currency of distribution: a principle of need must be complemented either with a theory on the human good or a theory about the proper goals of health care. Second, it has to say something about where the threshold should be set. However, any attempt to set a threshold seems morally arbitrary in the light of the sufficientarian idea that those just above the threshold never should be given priority over those just below the threshold. (shrink)

This article argues that values that apply to health care allocation entail the possibility of “spectrum arguments,” and that it is plausible that they often fail to determine a best alternative. In order to deal with this problem, a two-step process is suggested. First, we should identify the Strongly Uncovered Set that excludes all alternatives that are worse than some alternatives and not better in any relevant dimension from the set of eligible alternatives. Because the remaining set of alternatives often (...) contain more than one element, we need some complementary method of selecting a unique alternative. In order to address this issue, I suggest that we must invoke caps on the values that are used to evaluate alternatives, and that these caps must be grounded in collective commitments. (shrink)

How should states and international organizations allocate global health resources? This paper examines proposals for distributing these resources in the literature. First, we look at the literature on the metrics for measuring what matters and consider how they might be modified to avoid some common objections—e.g., that these measures discriminate against the disabled or fail to give due weight to helping the young (or old) or those in present (or future) generations. Second, we canvas existing approaches to evaluating allocations of (...) health‐related resources utilizing such measures and advance a new way of doing so. We suggest that it is important to provide substantive arguments for directly evaluating alternative allocations, but there is also room for deliberation about fair procedures for selecting allocation criteria and securing just outcomes. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungAdipositas ist eine weltweite Herausforderung für die Gesundheitssysteme. In Zeiten des demografischen Wandels sind auch immer mehr ältere Menschen davon betroffen, was sowohl die Akut- als auch die Langzeitpflege vor erhebliche Herausforderungen stellt. Bislang fehlt eine detaillierte Analyse der vielfältigen Gruppe der über 65-Jährigen in diesem Bereich. Weder die Bedürfnisse der Pflegebedürftigen noch der Pflegekräfte und Einrichtungen werden beobachtet, analysiert oder systematisch bewertet. Darüber hinaus sind die ethischen Implikationen der professionellen Pflege von älteren Menschen mit Adipositas in Forschung und Politik (...) noch nicht diskutiert worden. Wir argumentieren, dass ein bedürfnisorientierter Ansatz angemessen ist, um diese ethische Komplexität anzugehen. Dafür sollte eine breite und umfassende Analyse der ethischen Aspekte aus einer interdisziplinären Perspektive erfolgen. Daher führen wir ein systematische Literaturrecherche (Scoping Review) und eine thematische Fallanalyse durch, um den aktuellen Stand der Forschung aus professionellen Pflegeeinrichtungen in europäischen und nordamerikanischen Institutionen zusammenzufassen. So gewinnen wir Einblicke in die direkten Erfahrungen von Leistungserbringern und adipösen Patient*innen im Pflegebereich. Wir kommen zu dem Schluss, dass auch in Deutschland ein erheblicher Forschungsbedarf an der Schnittstelle ethischer Herausforderungen von Langzeitpflege, Alter und Adipositas besteht. Aus der begrenzten Anzahl von (Fall‑)Studien, die sich finden lassen, geht eine Reihe von ethischen Bedenken hervor, die direkte Auswirkungen auf den Zugang, die Inanspruchnahme und die Qualität der Versorgung haben. Ein empirisch-ethischer Ansatz kann die künftige Forschung und Pflegepraxis im Bereich der Adipositas und der Altenpflege leiten. Schwerpunkte der zukünftigen Mixed-methods-Forschung sollten sein: die Bedürfnisse adipöser älterer Menschen und ihrer Pfleger*innen, Kriterien für die Abwägung von Bedürfnissen und Ressourcenallokation sowie praktische Lösungen für mehrfach stigmatisierte Menschen. (shrink)

In this paper we explore the relation between health-care needs and patients’ desires within shared decision-making in a context of priority setting in health care. We begin by outlining some general characteristics of the concept of health-care need as well as the notions of SDM and desire. Secondly we will discuss how to distinguish between needs and desires for health care. Thirdly we present three cases which all aim to bring out and discuss a number of queries which seem to (...) arise due to the double focus on a patient’s need and what that patient desires. These queries regard the following themes: the objectivity and moral force of needs, the prediction about what kind of patients which will appear on a micro level, implications for ranking in priority setting, difficulties regarding assessing and comparing benefits, and implications for evidence-based medicine. (shrink)

One generally considered plausible way to allocate resources in health care is according to people’s needs. In this paper I focus on a somewhat overlooked issue, that is the conceptual structure of health care needs. It is argued that what conceptual understanding of needs one has is decisive in the assessment of what qualifies as a health care need and what does not. The aim for this paper is a clarification of the concept of health care need with a starting (...) point in the general philosophical discussion about needs. I outline three approaches to the concept of need and argue that they all share the same conceptual underpinnings. The concept of need is then analyzed in terms of a subject x needing some object y in order to achieve some goal z. I then discuss the relevant features of the object y and the goal z which make a given need qualify as a health care need and not just a need for anything. (shrink)

Allocating on the basis of need is a distinguishing principle in publicly funded health care systems. Resources ought to be directed to patients, or the health program, where the need is considered greatest. In Sweden support of this principle can be found in health care legislation. Today however some domains of what appear to be health care needs are excluded from the responsibilities of the publicly funded health care system. Corrections of eye disorders known as refractive errors is one such (...) domain. In this article the moral legitimacy of this exception is explored. Individuals with refractive errors need spectacles, contact lenses or refractive surgery to do all kinds of thing, including participating in everyday activities, managing certain jobs, and accomplishing various goals in life. The relief of correctable visual impairments fits well into the category of what we typically consider a health care need. The study of refractive errors does belong to the field of medical science, interventions to correct such errors can be performed by medical means, and the skills of registered health care professionals are required when it comes to correcting refractive error. As visual impairments caused by other conditions than refractive errors are treated and funded within the public health care system in Sweden this is an inconsistency that needs to be addressed. (shrink)

A pandemic may cause a sudden imbalance between available medical resources and medical needs where fundamental care to a patient cannot be delivered. Inability to fulfil a professional commitment to deliver care as needed can lead to distress among caregivers and patients. This distress is sometimes alleviated through mechanisms that hide the facts that care is rationed and not all medical needs are met. We have identified three mechanisms that jeopardise accountable and optimal allocation of resources: (1) hidden value judgements (...) that allow rationing under the disguise of triage or prioritisation, (2) disguised conflict of interest between societal and individual patient’s needs and (3) concealed biases in the application of medical tools. Under these three pitfalls decisions of resource allocation and who gets treated are handled as medical decisions: normative decisions are concealed and perceived as falling with the realm of medical judgement. Value judgements and moral agency are hidden to offer a ‘false sense of medical judgement’, while in fact there are several ethical judgements and biases at stake. The three pitfalls entail hidden normative deliberation and are inappropriate for sustainable healthcare delivery and resource allocation. We believe it is necessary to maintain transparency in decision making under conditions of insufficient resources to maintain trust in professional care givers and secure fair treatment allocation. Recognition of the pitfalls, by applying our recommendations, may help to ensure transparent and accountable distribution of care and contribute to public acceptance of the ethics behind rationing. (shrink)

Should there be a female age limit on public funding for assisted reproductive technology (ART)? The question bears significant economic and sociopolitical implications and has been contentious in many countries. We conceptualise the question as one of justice in resource allocation, using three much-debated substantive principles of justice—the capacity to benefit, personal responsibility, and need—to structure and then explore a complex of arguments. Capacity-to-benefit arguments are not decisive: There are no clear cost-effectiveness grounds to restrict funding to those older women (...) who still bear some capacity to benefit from ART. Personal responsibility arguments are challenged by structural determinants of delayed motherhood. Nor are need arguments decisive: They can speak either for or against a female age limit, depending on the conception of need used. We demonstrate how these principles can differ not only in content but also in the relative importance they are accorded by governments. Wide variation in ART public funding policy might be better understood in this light. We conclude with some inter-country comparison. New Zealand and Swedish policies are uncommonly transparent and thus demonstrate particularly well how the arguments we explore have been put into practice. (shrink)

We clarify options for conceptualizing equity, or what we refer to as justice, in resource allocation. We do this by systematically differentiating, expounding, and then illustrating eight different substantive principles of justice. In doing this, we compare different meanings that can be attributed to “need” and “the capacity to benefit”. Our comparison is sharpened by two analytical tools. First, quantification helps to clarify the divergent consequences of allocations commended by competing principles. Second, a diagrammatic approach developed by economists Culyer and (...) Wagstaff offers a visual and conceptual aid. Of the eight principles we illustrate, only two treat as relevant both a person’s initial health state and a person’s CTB per resource unit expended: allocate resources so as to most closely equalize final health states and allocate resources so as to equally restore health states to population norms. These allocative principles ought to be preferred to the alternatives if one deems relevant both a person’s initial health state and a person’s CTB per resource unit expended. Finally, we examine some possibilities for conceptualizing benefits as relative to how badly off someone is, extending Parfit’s thought on Prioritarianism. Questions arise as to how much intervention effects accruing to the worse off count for more and how this changes with improving health. We explicate some recent efforts to answer these questions, including in Dutch and British government circles. These efforts can be viewed as efforts to operationalize need as an allocative principle. Each effort seeks to maximize in the aggregate quanta of effect that are differentially valued in favor of the worst off. In this respect, each effort constitutes one type of Prioritarianism, which Parfit failed to differentiate from other types. (shrink)