Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Triage and justice in an unjust pandemic: ethical allocation of scarce medical resources in the setting of racial and socioeconomic disparities.Benjamin Tolchin, Sarah C. Hull & Katherine Kraschel - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (3):200-202.
    Shortages of life-saving medical resources caused by COVID-19 have prompted hospitals, healthcare systems, and governmentsto develop crisis standards of care, including 'triage protocols' to potentially ration medical supplies during the public health emergency. At the same time, the pandemic has highlighted and exacerbated racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic health disparities that together constitute a form of structural racism. These disparities pose a critical ethical challenge in developing fair triage systems that will maximize lives saved without perpetuating systemic inequities. Here we review (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Triage of critical care resources in COVID-19: a stronger role for justice.Lynette Reid - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (8):526-530.
    Some ethicists assert that there is a consensus that maximising medical outcomes takes precedence as a principle of resource allocation in emergency triage of absolutely scarce resources. But the nature of the current severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 pandemic and the history of debate about balancing equity and efficiency in resource allocation do not support this assertion. I distinguish a number of concerns with justice and balancing considerations that should play a role in critical care triage policy, focusing on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Prioritarianism: A (Pluralist) Defence.Shai Shimon Yehuda Agmon & Matt Hitchens - 2019 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 15 (1).
    A well-known objection to prioritarianism, famously levelled by Mike Otsuka and Alex Voorhoeve, is that it wrongly ignores the unity of the individual in treating intra-personal cases like inter-personal cases. In this paper we accept that there should be a moral shift between these cases, but argue that this is because autonomy is a relevant consideration in intra-personal but not inter-personal cases, and one to which pluralist prioritarians ought to attend. To avoid this response, Otsuka and Voorhoeve must assume we (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Priority, Preference and Value.Martin O'neill - 2012 - Utilitas 24 (3):332-348.
    This article seeks to defend prioritarianism against a pair of challenges from Michael Otsuka and Alex Voorhoeve. Otsuka and Voorhoeve first argue that prioritarianism makes implausible recommendations in one-person cases under conditions of risk, as it fails to allow that it is reasonable to act to maximize expected utility, rather than expected weighted benefits, in such cases. I show that, in response, prioritarians can either reject Otsuka and Voorhoeve's claim, by means of appealing to a distinction between personal and impersonal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • The Community Speaks: Continuous Deep Sedation as Caregiving Versus Physician-Assisted Suicide as Killing.Carol L. Powers & Paul C. McLean - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (6):65 - 66.
    The American Journal of Bioethics, Volume 11, Issue 6, Page 65-66, June 2011.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations