Personal responsibility for health as a rationing criterion: why we don't like it and why maybe we should

被引:87
作者
Buyx, A. M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Program Eth & Hlth, Boston, MA 02115 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1136/jme.2007.024059
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Whether it is fair to use personal responsibility of patients for their own health as a rationing criterion in healthcare is a controversial matter. A host of difficulties are associated with the concept of personal responsibility in the field of medicine. These include, in particular, theoretical considerations of justice and such practical issues as multiple causal factors in medicine and freedom of health behaviour. In the article, personal responsibility is evaluated from the perspective of several theories of justice. It is argued that in a healthcare system based on both equality of opportunity and solidarity, responsible health behaviour can-in principle-be justifiably expected. While the practical problems associated with personal responsibility are important, they do not warrant the common knee-jerk refusal to think more deeply about responsibility for health as a means of allocating healthcare resources. In conclusion, the possibility of introducing personal responsibility as a fair rationing criterion is briefly sketched.
引用
收藏
页码:871 / 874
页数:4
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]  
*ADV COUNC ASS DEV, 2001, APPR EFF
[2]   What is the point of equality? [J].
Anderson, ES .
ETHICS, 1999, 109 (02) :287-337
[3]  
Arneson R. J, 1997, EQUALITY SELECTED RE, P229
[4]  
Bagaric M, 2005, J LAW MED, V12, P323
[5]  
Banja John, 2004, Case Manager, V15, P43, DOI 10.1016/j.casemgr.2004.09.005
[6]   Solidarity in Swedish welfare -: Standing the test of time? [J].
Bergmark, Å .
HEALTH CARE ANALYSIS, 2000, 8 (04) :395-411
[7]  
BETANCOURT JR, 2007, PREV CHRONIC DIS, V4, P1
[8]   Personal responsibility and physician responsibility - West Virginia's Medicaid plan [J].
Bishop, Gene ;
Brodkey, Amy C. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2006, 355 (08) :756-758
[9]  
BUCHANAN A., 2000, From Chance to Choice: Genetics andJustice
[10]  
BUYX A, 2005, ETHIK MED, V17, P269