Rationing Health Care and the Role of the 'Acute Principle'
In several works, Hartmut Kliemt has developed an original account on the necessity of rationing health care and on how a rationing policy should be carried out. While I agree on several important points of that view, there is one important aspect of his account that I do not find plausible: his claim that the so-called 'acute principle' (a principle that gives absolute preeminence to rescuing identified lives from dying) should be one of the basic criteria to carry out a rationing policy in a liberal state. After explaining Kliemt's view on rationing health care and, more specifically, the foundations of the acute principle, I argue that the acute principle is not supported by our basic moral intuitions. I then apply the previous argument to the case of rationing, arguing for the necessity of a compromise among intuitions supporting the acute principle and other moral intuitions. Finally, I try to show that a feasible system of public health care services is conceivable. In doing so, I make use, with some relevant modifications, of Kliemt's own ideas.
Year of publication: |
2009
|
---|---|
Authors: | Rivera-Lopez, Eduardo |
Published in: |
Rationality, Markets and Morals. - Frankfurt School of Finance and Management, ISSN 1869-778X. - 2009, 11, 30
|
Publisher: |
Frankfurt School of Finance and Management |
Subject: | health care | health ethics | rationing in medicine | distributive justice | scarce resources | prioritization | acute principle |
Saved in:
freely available
Saved in favorites
Similar items by subject
-
Health Care Rationing and Distributive Justice
Breyer, Friedrich, (2009)
-
Rationing in Medicine: A Presupposition for Humanity and Justice
Gubernatis, Gundolf, (2009)
-
The 'Rule of Rescue' in Medical Priority Setting: Ethical Plausibilities and Implausibilities
Schoene-Seifert, Bettina, (2009)
- More ...