Health Care as a Right, Fairness and Medical Resources

Häyry, Matti; Häyry, Heta

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.1990.tb00062.x

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is universally recognized that a fair and just system must be utilized in the allocation of scarce medical resources. However, ethical considerations must be implemented in the distribution system, which has triggered lengthy debates among medical ethicists (Engelhardt & Cherry, 2002; Hayry & Hayry, 1990; Langford, 1992; Tolloczko, 2000; Ward, 1986).…”

Section: Variables Used In Furnham and Colleagues' Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Affecting Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources Across Life‐Threatening Medical Conditions

Furnham

Ariffin

McClelland

2007

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to determine whether participants used different criteria to allocate scarce medical resources depending on the medical condition. Allocations of HIV antiretroviral treatment and heart‐transplant surgery were examined. Participants completed 2 questionnaires requiring them to prioritize 16 hypothetical patients. Demographic data on hypothetical patients varied on 4 dimensions: age, gender, sexual orientation, and promiscuity. There were significant main effects of age, sexual orientation, and promiscuity in both medical conditions. Young people were favored over old, heterosexuals over homosexuals, and monogamous over promiscuous patients. Stronger effects of sexual orientation and promiscuity were found in the HIV treatment condition. Participants used a more utilitarian approach in their allocation decisions and demonstrated prejudice against homosexuals and promiscuous patients.

show abstract

Section: Variables Used In Furnham and Colleagues' Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Affecting Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources Across Life‐Threatening Medical Conditions

Furnham

Ariffin

McClelland

2007

J Applied Social Pyschol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…I and others have done that decades ago and repeated it more recently. 20,21,22,23,24 The point here is that insofar as healthcare crisis leadership is ethics communication, health utilitarianism cannot be presented to the public accurately, truthfully, and acceptably and all at once. Governments moving along from the initial pandemic control to ongoing confinement and mitigation or full suppression of the virus from their region have to find a better truthful narrative or consider not telling the truth, or at least the whole truth, to begin with.…”

Section: Ethics Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Healthcare Crisis Leadership as Ethics Communication

Häyry¹

2020

Camb Q Healthc Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governmental reactions to crises like the COVID-19 pandemic can be seen as ethics communication. Governments can contain the disease and thereby mitigate the detrimental public health impact; allow the virus to spread to reach herd immunity; test, track, isolate, and treat; and suppress the disease regionally. An observation of Sweden and Finland showed a difference in feasible ways to communicate the chosen policy to the citizenry. Sweden assumed the herd immunity strategy and backed it up with health utilitarian arguments. This was easy to communicate to the Swedish people, who appreciated the voluntary restrictions approach and trusted their decision makers. Finland chose the contain and mitigate strategy and was towards the end of the observation period apparently hesitating between suppression and the test, track, isolate, and treat approach. Both are difficult to communicate to the general public accurately, truthfully, and acceptably. Apart from health utilitarian argumentation, something like the republican political philosophy or selective truth telling are needed. The application of republicanism to the issue, however, is problematic, and hiding the truth seems to go against the basic tenets of liberal democracy.

show abstract

“…153 In the health industry, in both private and public sectors, the pursued good is often, and quite naturally, health as a physical and mental condition. 154 This can leave out cultural, social, and ethical considerations that arguably belong to the definition of good as inherently as the absence of disease, illness, and disability. 155,156 Paradoxically, "health utilitarianism" can then inflict non-health-related harm on individuals and become a form of moralism.…”

Section: Do Considerations Of Justice Turn Bad Moralism Into Good Mormentioning

confidence: 99%

Justice and the Possibility of Good Moralism in Bioethics

Häyry¹

2019

Camb Q Healthc Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Moralism in bioethics and elsewhere means going beyond accepted moral principles, either by exaggerating good ethical concerns, by applying them to areas where they do not belong, or simply by assuming anything else than concrete physical or mental harm as normative guides. This paper explores the conceptual background of moralism especially in the consequentialist tradition, presents cases of allegedly bad moralism in the light of this exploration, introduces six approaches to justice, and argues that these approaches question our prevailing views on the goodness and badness of moralism in its various forms.

show abstract

Health Care as a Right, Fairness and Medical Resources

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Factors Affecting Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources Across Life‐Threatening Medical Conditions

Factors Affecting Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources Across Life‐Threatening Medical Conditions

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Healthcare Crisis Leadership as Ethics Communication

Justice and the Possibility of Good Moralism in Bioethics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About