Switch to: Citations

References in:

The framing of the six-month abstinence rule in liver transplantation. An example of linguistically mediated patterns of interpretation used to limit indication area

Nadia Primc

Ethik in der Medizin 32 (3):239-253 (2020)

Add references

You must login to add references.

(1 other version)When good organs go to bad people.H. O. Dien - 2008 - Bioethics 22 (2):77–83.details ABSTRACT A number of philosophers have argued that alcoholics should receive lower priority for liver transplantations because they are morally responsible for their medical conditions. In this paper, I argue that this conclusion is false. Moral responsibility should not be used as a criterion for the allocation of medical resources. The reason I advance goes further than the technical problem of assessing moral responsibility. The deeper problem is that using moral responsibility as an allocation criterion undermines the functioning of medicine. Download Export citation Bookmark 6 citations
Responsibility and Priority in Liver Transplantation.Walter Glannon - 2009 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 18 (1):23-35.details In a provocative 1991 paper, Alvin Moss and Mark Siegler argued that it may be fair to give individuals with alcohol-related end-stage liver disease lower priority for a liver transplant than those who develop end-stage liver disease from other factors. Like other organs, there is a substantial gap between the available livers for transplantation and the number of people who need liver transplants. Yet, unlike those with end-stage renal disease, who can survive for some time on dialysis before receiving a (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 10 citations
Ethics: Who gets the liver transplant? The use of responsibility as the tie breaker.V. Thornton - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (12):739-742.details Is it possible to invoke the use of moral responsibility as part of the selection criteria in the allocation of livers for transplant? Criticism has been applied to the difficulties inherent in including such a criterion and also the effect that employing such a judgement might have upon the relationship between the physician and patient. However, these criticisms rely on speculation and conjecture and do not relate to all the arguments put forward in favour of applying moral responsibility. None of (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 15 citations
Why Alcoholics Ought to Compete Equally for Liver Transplants.Alexander Zambrano - 2016 - Bioethics 30 (9):689-697.details Some philosophers and physicians have argued that alcoholic patients, who are responsible for their liver failure by virtue of alcoholism, ought to be given lower priority for a transplant when donated livers are being allocated to patients in need of a liver transplant. The primary argument for this proposal, known as the Responsibility Argument, is based on the more general idea that patients who require scarce medical resources should be given lower priority for those resources when they are responsible for (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 5 citations
(1 other version)When good organs go to bad people.Dien Ho - 2008 - Bioethics 22 (2):77-83.details ABSTRACT A number of philosophers have argued that alcoholics should receive lower priority for liver transplantations because they are morally responsible for their medical conditions. In this paper, I argue that this conclusion is false. Moral responsibility should not be used as a criterion for the allocation of medical resources. The reason I advance goes further than the technical problem of assessing moral responsibility. The deeper problem is that using moral responsibility as an allocation criterion undermines the functioning of medicine. Download Export citation Bookmark 14 citations

1