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 (...) strict definition of medical need on the grounds that this presupposes, wrongly, that medical intervention should always be a last resort. (shrink)

Background: Severity plays an essential role in healthcare priority setting. Still, severity is an under-theorised concept. One controversy concerns whether severity should be risk- and/or time-sensitive. The aim of this article is to provide a normative analysis of this question. Methods: A reflective equilibrium approach is used, where judgements and arguments concerning severity in preventive situations are related to overall normative judgements and background theories in priority-setting, aiming for consistency. Analysis, discussion, and conclusions: There is an argument for taking the (...) risk of developing a condition into account, and we do this when we consider the risk of dying in the severity assessment. If severity is discounted according to risk, this will ‘dilute’ severity, depending on how well we are able to delineate the population, which is dependent on the current level of knowledge. This will potentially have a more far-reaching effect when considering primary prevention, potentially the de-prioritisation of effective preventive treatments in relation to acute, less-effective treatments. The risk arguments are dependent on which population is being assessed. If we focus on the whole population at risk, with T 0 as the relevant population, this supports the risk argument. If we instead focus on the population of as-yet (at T 0 ) unidentified individuals who will develop the condition at T 1, risk will become irrelevant, and severity will not be risk sensitive. The strongest argument for time-sensitive severity (or for discounting future severity) is the future development of technology. On a short timescale, this will differ between different diagnoses, supporting individualised discounting. On a large timescale, a more general discounting might be acceptable. However, we need to also consider the systemic effects of allowing severity to be risk- and time-sensitive. (shrink)

Priority setting in health care is ubiquitous and health authorities are increasingly recognising the need for priority setting guidelines to ensure efficient, fair, and equitable resource allocation. While cost-effectiveness concerns seem to dominate many policies, the tension between utilitarian and deontological concerns is salient to many, and various severity criteria appear to fill this gap. Severity, then, must be subjected to rigorous ethical and philosophical analysis. Here we first give a brief history of the path to today’s severity criteria in (...) Norway and Sweden. The Scandinavian perspective on severity might be conducive to the international discussion, given its long-standing use as a priority setting criterion, despite having reached rather different conclusions so far. We then argue that severity can be viewed as a multidimensional concept, drawing on accounts of need, urgency, fairness, duty to save lives, and human dignity. Such concerns will often be relative to local mores, and the weighting placed on the various dimensions cannot be expected to be fixed. Thirdly, we present what we think are the most pertinent questions to answer about severity in order to facilitate decision making in the coming years of increased scarcity, and to further the understanding of underlying assumptions and values that go into these decisions. We conclude that severity is poorly understood, and that the topic needs substantial further inquiry; thus we hope this article may set a challenging and important research agenda. (shrink)

Background Healthy aging is one of the essential aspects of a health promotion program in the elderly. Aim Exploring ethical challenges in healthy elderly care from the perspective of nurses, older adults, and families in the Iranian context. Research Design This qualitative study was conducted using a content analysis approach in 4 health centers in northeastern Iran from 2017 to 2019. Semi-structured interviews, observation, review of elderly files, and focus groups were used to collect data. Ethical considerations The ethics committee (...) of the university approved this study in Iran. This study adhered to the principles of the Helsinki Declaration. Ethical principles autonomy, confidentiality, and anonymity were considered for the participants. Participants were informed about the purpose of the study and submitted written informed consent regarding their participation. Findings The central theme was: An unfair approach to caring for healthy older adults. The three categories were as follows: Forgotten human care, disrespect, and lack of a meaningful and trustworthy relationship. The 14 subcategories highlighted the ethical challenges of healthy aging care in health centers. Discussion The findings showed that due to nurses’ unfamiliarity with the concept of healthy aging, older adults are discriminated against in care centers. Creating a standard care program for healthy older adults ensures that ethical principles are followed for these clients. Conclusion Various individual and organizational factors lead to an unfair approach to caring for healthy elderly in health centers. The following factors can help improve the care of healthy aging and reduce ethical challenges in this area: Introducing nurses to the concept of healthy old age and its dimensions, creating a community-based approach in health centers, prioritizing health issues over health issues, Involvement of families and older adults in needs assessment-goal setting-implementation and evaluation of health services, and design of home visit programs to provide services to healthy elderly. (shrink)