Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Should patients with self–inflicted illness receive lower priority in access to healthcare resources.K. Sharkey & L. Gillam - 2010 - Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (11):661-665.
    The distribution of scarce healthcare resources is an increasingly important issue due to factors such as expensive ‘high tech’ medicine, longer life expectancies and the rising prevalence of chronic illness. Furthermore, in the current healthcare context lifestyle-related factors such as high blood pressure, tobacco use and obesity are believed to contribute significantly to the global burden of disease. As such, this paper focuses on an ongoing debate in the academic literature regarding the role of responsibility for illness in healthcare resource (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
  • Social acceptability, personal responsibility, and prognosis in public judgments and transplant allocation.Peter A. Ubel, Jonathan Baron & David A. Asch - 1999 - Bioethics 13 (1):57–68.
    Background: Some members of the general public feel that patients who cause their own organ failure through smoking, alcohol use, or drug use should not receive equal priority for scarce transplantable organs. This may reflect a belief that these patients (1) cause their own illness, (2) have poor transplant prognoses or, (3) are simply unworthy. We explore the role that social acceptability, personal responsibility, and prognosis play in people's judgments about transplant allocation. Methods: By random allocation, we presented 283 prospective (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • The Ethics of Making Patients Responsible.Sven Ove Hansson - 2018 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 27 (1):87-92.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Enhancement and desert.Thomas Douglas - 2019 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 18 (1):3-22.
    It is sometimes claimed that those who succeed with the aid of enhancement technologies deserve the rewards associated with their success less, other things being equal, than those who succeed without the aid of such technologies. This claim captures some widely held intuitions, has been implicitly endorsed by participants in social–psychological research and helps to undergird some otherwise puzzling philosophical objections to the use of enhancement technologies. I consider whether it can be provided with a rational basis. I examine three (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • (1 other version)The problem of action.Harry G. Frankfurt - 1997 - In Alfred R. Mele (ed.), The philosophy of action. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 157-62.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   195 citations  
  • (2 other versions)Harm to Self.Joel Feinberg & Donald Vandeveer - 1988 - Ethics 98 (3):550-565.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   123 citations  
  • Personal and Social Responsibility for Health.Daniel Wikler - 2002 - Ethics and International Affairs 16 (2):47-55.
    Everyone wants to be healthy, but many of us decline to act in healthy ways. Should these choices have any bearing on the ethics of clinical practice and health policy? How may personal responsibility for health be manipulated in health policy debates.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   62 citations  
  • Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition Advancing the Debate.Jonathan Evans & Keith E. Stanovich - 2013 - Perspectives on Psychological Science 8 (3):223-241.
    Dual-process and dual-system theories in both cognitive and social psychology have been subjected to a number of recently published criticisms. However, they have been attacked as a category, incorrectly assuming there is a generic version that applies to all. We identify and respond to 5 main lines of argument made by such critics. We agree that some of these arguments have force against some of the theories in the literature but believe them to be overstated. We argue that the dual-processing (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   403 citations  
  • Irresponsibly Infertile? Obesity, Efficiency, and Exclusion from Treatment.Rebecca C. H. Brown - 2019 - Health Care Analysis 27 (2):61-76.
    Many countries tightly ration access to publicly funded fertility treatments such as in vitro fertilisation. One basis for excluding people from access to IVF is their body mass index. In this paper, I consider a number of potential justifications for such a policy, based on claims about effectiveness and cost-efficiency, and reject these as unsupported by available evidence. I consider an alternative justification: that those whose subfertility results from avoidable behaviours for which they are responsible are less deserving of treatment. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations