Switch to: References

Citations of:

The Case for Valuing Non-Health and Indirect Benefits

Govind Persad & Jessica du Toit

In Ole F. Norheim, Ezekiel J. Emanuel & Joseph Millum (eds.), Global Health Priority-Setting: Beyond Cost-Effectiveness. Oxford University Press. pp. 207-222 (2019)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

A Conceptual Framework for Clearer Ethical Discussions About COVID-19 Response.Govind C. Persad - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (7):98-101.details In this Commentary, I propose an ethical framework for ethical discussions around the allocation of scarce resources in COVID-19 response. The framework incorporates four principles: beneficence (benefiting people by saving lives or years of life), equality, remedying disadvantage, and recognizing past conduct. I then discuss how the framework interacts with ethical constraints against using people as a mere means and against causing death. The commentary closes by criticizing the equation of deontological ethics with random or first-come, first-served allocation and of (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
Newborn health benefits or financial risk protection? An ethical analysis of a real-life dilemma in a setting without universal health coverage.Kristine Husøy Onarheim, Ole Frithjof Norheim & Ingrid Miljeteig - 2018 - Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (8):524-530.details IntroductionHigh healthcare costs make illness precarious for both patients and their families’ economic situation. Despite the recent focus on the interconnection between health and financial risk at the systemic level, the ethical conflict between concerns for potential health benefits and financial risk protection at the household level in a low-income setting is less understood.MethodsUsing a seven-step ethical analysis, we examine a real-life dilemma faced by families and health workers at the micro level in Ethiopia and analyse the acceptability of limiting (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 1 citation
Should health research funding be proportional to the burden of disease?Joseph Millum - 2023 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 22 (1):76-99.details Public funders of health research have been widely criticized on the grounds that their allocations of funding for disease-specific research do not reflect the relative burdens imposed by different diseases. For example, the US National Institutes of Health spends a much greater fraction of its budget on HIV/aids research and a much smaller fraction on migraine research than their relative contribution to the US burden of disease would suggest. Implicit in this criticism is a normative claim: Insofar as the scientific (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
Proportionality in cyberwar and just war theory.Fredrik D. Hjorthen & James Pattison - 2023 - Ethics and Global Politics 16 (1):1-24.details Which harms and benefits should be viewed as relevant when considering whether to launch cyber-measures? In this article, we consider this question, which matters because it is central to determining whether cyber-measures should be launched. Several just war theorists hold a version of what we call the ‘Restrictive View’, according to which there are restrictions on the sorts of harms and benefits that should be included in proportionality assessments about the justifiability of going to war (whether cyber or kinetic). We (...) Download Export citation Bookmark
Bioethics Emergencies Can Be Used to Perform a Real-World Test of Utilitarian Policies.Mark Fedyk, Hugh Black, Mark Yarborough, Nathan Fairman & Neil S. Wenger - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (7):101-103.details Volume 20, Issue 7, July 2020, Page 101-103. Download Export citation Bookmark

1