6 found
Order:
See also
Govind Persad
University of Denver
  1. The Case for Resource Sensitivity: Why It Is Ethical to Provide Cheaper, Less Effective Treatments in Global Health.Govind C. Persad & Ezekiel J. Emanuel - 2017 - Hastings Center Report 47 (5):17-24.
    We consider an ethical dilemma in global health: is it ethically acceptable to provide some patients cheaper treatments that are less effective or more toxic than the treatments other patients receive? We argue that it is ethical to consider local resource constraints when deciding what interventions to provide. The provision of cheaper, less effective health care is frequently the most effective way of promoting health and realizing the ethical values of utility, equality, and priority to the worst off.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  2. The Current State of Medical School Education in Bioethics, Health Law, and Health Economics.Govind C. Persad, Linden Elder, Laura Sedig, Leonardo Flores & Ezekiel J. Emanuel - 2008 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 36 (1):89-94.
    Current challenges in medical practice, research, and administration demand physicians who are familiar with bioethics, health law, and health economics. Curriculum directors at American Association of Medical Colleges-affiliated medical schools were sent confidential surveys requesting the number of required hours of the above subjects and the years in which they were taught, as well as instructor names. The number of relevant publications since 1990 for each named instructor was assessed by a PubMed search.In sum, teaching in all three subjects combined (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  3. Risk, Everyday Intuitions, and the Institutional Value of Tort Law.Govind C. Persad - 2009 - Stan. L. Rev 62:1445.
    This Note offers a normative critique of cost-benefit analysis, one informed by deontological moral theory, in the context of the debate over whether tort litigation or a non-tort approach is the appropriate response to mass harm. The first Part argues that the difference between lay and expert intuitions about risk and harm often reflects a difference in normative judgments about the existing facts, rather than a difference in belief about what facts exist, which makes the lay intuitions more defensible. The (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  69
    Expanding Deliberation in Critical-Care Policy Design.Govind C. Persad - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (1):60-63.
    In this commentary, I suggest expanding the deliberative aspects of critical care policy development in two ways. First, critical-care policy development should expand the scope of deliberation by leaving fewer issues up to expertise or private choice. For instance. it should allow deliberation about the relevance of age, disability, social position, and psychological well-being to allocation decisions. Second, it should broaden both the set of costs considered and the set of stakeholders represented in the deliberative process. In particular, it should (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5. Standing by Our Principles: Meaningful Guidance, Moral Foundations, and Multi-Principle Methodology in Medical Scarcity.Govind C. Persad, Alan Wertheimer & Ezekiel J. Emanuel - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (4):46 – 48.
    In this short response to Kerstein and Bognar, we clarify three aspects of the complete lives system, which we propose as a system of allocating scarce medical interventions. We argue that the complete lives system provides meaningful guidance even though it does not provide an algorithm. We also defend the investment modification to the complete lives system, which prioritizes adolescents and older children over younger children; argue that sickest-first allocation remains flawed when scarcity is absolute and ongoing; and argue that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6. The Ethics of Expanding Access to Cheaper, Less Effective Treatments.Govind C. Persad & Ezekiel J. Emanuel - 2016 - The Lancet:S0140-6736(15)01025-9.
    This article examines a fundamental question of justice in global health. Is it ethically preferable to provide a larger number of people with cheaper treatments that are less effective (or more toxic), or to restrict treatments to a smaller group to provide a more expensive but more effective or less toxic alternative? We argue that choosing to provide less effective or more toxic interventions to a larger number of people is favored by the principles of utility, equality, and priority for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark