Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-g7b4s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-05T02:02:22.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
This chapter is part of a book that is no longer available to purchase from Cambridge Core

13 - Ethics and the allocation of health-care resources

Kerry J. Breen ,
Stephen M. Cordner ,
Colin J. H. Thomson  and
Vernon D. Plueckhahn
Kerry J. Breen
Affiliation:
National Health and Medical Research Council
Stephen M. Cordner
Affiliation:
Monash University, Victoria
Colin J. H. Thomson
Affiliation:
University of Wollongong, New South Wales
Vernon D. Plueckhahn
Affiliation:
Monash University, Victoria
Get access

Summary

Autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice are four of the basic principles upon which ethical medical practice is founded (see Chapter 1). In the allocation of health-care resources, be it at government, institutional or medical practitioner level, the principle of justice, particularly ‘distributive justice’, is central. In 1990, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NRMRC) in the Discussion Paper on Ethics and Resource Allocation said:

In the allocation of any public resources our concern should be primarily with justice. This involves giving to each person his or her due. In allocating health care resources our concern is largely with distributive justice – to distribute amongst members of the community those benefits and burdens due to them. The basis of distributive justice is the notion of fairness. The most appropriate criterion for a fair distribution of resources would appear to be those of equity and need. More specifically, a just allocation should offer equal treatment for those whose needs are similar. In other words, each person is entitled to enjoy an appropriate share of the sum total of the resources available according to their need. However, the need which justifies one person's entitlement must be a need which can be fulfilled in a way compatible with fulfilling the similar needs of others.

Modern society stresses that arbitrary discrimination between people with the same needs cannot be morally justifiable.

Type
Chapter
Information
Good Medical Practice
Professionalism, Ethics and Law
 , pp. 195 - 207
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

,National Health and Medical Research Council. Discussion Paper on Ethics and Resource Allocation in Health Care. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, 1990.Google Scholar
Cassel, CK, Brennan, TE. Managing medical resources. Return to the commons?JAMA 2007; 297: 2518–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, DS, Gibson, JL, Sibbald, R et al. Clinical ethicists' perspectives on organisational ethics in health-care organizations. J Med Ethics 2008; 34: 320–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,Royal College of Physicians report. Doctors in Society: Medical Professionalism in a Changing World. Royal College of Physicians, UK, 2005.Google Scholar
,Medical Professionalism Project. Medical professionalism in the new millennium: a physicians' charter. Med J Aust 2002; 177: 263–5.Google Scholar
Breen, KJ. Medical professionalism: is it really under threat?Med J Aust 2007; 186: 596–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Breen, KJ. The patient–doctor relationship in the new millennium: adjusting positively to commercialism and consumerism. Clinics in Dermatology 2001; 19: 19–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leget, C, Hoedemakers, R. Teaching medical students about fair distribution of health care resources. J Med Ethics 2007; 33: 737–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillon, R.Philosophical Medical Ethics. Wiley, Chichester, 1990, pp. 86–99.Google ScholarPubMed
Daniels, N. Is the Oregon rationing plan fair?JAMA 1991; 265: 2232–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dixon, J, Welch, HG. Priority setting: lessons from Oregon. Lancet 1991; 337: 891–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ham, C. Retracing the Oregon trail: the experience of rationing and the Oregon plan. BMJ 1998; 316: 1965–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, JB, Haber, SG, Khatutsky, G et al. Impact of the Oregon Health Plan on access and satisfaction of adults with low income. Health Services Research 2002; 37: 11–31.Google ScholarPubMed
Tobin, B. The principle of justice: a bioethical perspective. Bioethics Outlook 2001; 12(4).Google Scholar
Lowe, M, Kerridge, IH, Mitchell, KR. ‘These sorts of people don't do very well’: race and allocation of health care resources. J Med Ethics 1995; 21: 356–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, A, Gormally, L. Health-care Allocation: An Ethical Framework for Public Policy. Linacre Centre, London, 2001.Google Scholar
Weale, A. The ethics of rationing. Br Med Bull 1995; 51: 831–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lauridson, SM, Norup, MS, Rossel, PJ. The secret art of managing health-care expenses: investigating implicit rationing and autonomy in public health-care systems. J Med Ethics 2007; 33: 704–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryan, S, Williams, I, McIver, S. Seeing the NICE side of cost-effectiveness analysis: a qualitative investigation of the use of CEA in NICE technology appraisals. Health Econ 2007; 16: 179–93.
Cassel, CK, Brennan, TE. Managing Medical Resources: return to the Commons?JAMA 2007; 297: 2518–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Culppepper, L, Gilbert, TT. Evidence and ethics. Lancet 1999; 353: 829–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerridge, I, Lowe, M, Henry, D. Ethics and evidence based medicine. BMJ 1998; 316: 1151–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
,World Medical Association. Declaration of Geneva (revised 2006). http://www.wma.net/e/policy/c8.htm
AMA Code of Ethics – 2004 (editorially revised 2006). http://www.ama.com.au/codeofethics
,General Medical Council. Good Medical Practice. General Medical Council, London, 1995.Google Scholar
,NSW Medical Board. Code of Professional Conduct. http://www.nswmb.org.au/index.pl?page=44
,Qld Medical Board. Good Medical Practice. http://www.medicalboard.qld.gov.au/resources/index.html
,Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, 2005. http://www.rcpsc.medical.org/canmeds/CanMEDS2005/index.php
Breen, KJ.The medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry – when will we open our eyes?Med J Aust 2004; 180: 409;3–10.Google ScholarPubMed
Heath, I. Combating disease mongering: daunting but nonetheless essential. PLoS 2006; 3(4): e146.Google ScholarPubMed
Chantler, C. How to do it: Be a manager. BMJ 1989; 278: 1505–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiatt, HH. Protecting the medical commons: who is responsible?N Eng J Med 1975; 293: 235–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daniels, N. Why saying no to patients in the United States is so hard: cost containment, justice, and provider autonomy. N Eng J Med 1986; 314: 1380–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurst, SA, Forde, R, Reiter-Theil, S et al. Physicians' views on resource availability and equity in four European health care systems. BMC Health Serv Res 2007; 31: 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurst, SA, Slowther, AM, Forde, R et al. Prevalence and determinants of physician bedside rationing: data from Europe. J Gen Intern Med 2006; 21: 1138–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jennett, B.High Technology Medicine: Benefits and Burdens. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986.Google Scholar
Hope, T, Spriging, S, Crisp, R. ‘Not clinically indicated’: patients' interests or resource allocation. BMJ 1993; 306: 379–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurst, SA, Danis, M. A framework for rationing by clinical judgment. Kennedy Inst Ethics J 2007; 17: 247–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brahams, D. Judicial review of refusal to fund treatment. Lancet 1995; 345: 717.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foster, C. Simple rationality? The law of health-care resource allocation in England. J Medical Ethics 2007; 33: 404–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Firstein, J.US state legislatures kept busy with managed care issues. Lancet 1996; 347: 1545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, JM, Mendus, S (eds). Philosophy and Medical Welfare. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988.
Daniels, N.Just Health: Meeting Health Needs Fairly. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008.Google Scholar
Daniels, N, Sabin, JE. Setting Limits Fairly. 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008.Google Scholar
Harris, J.The Value of Life. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1985.Google Scholar
Kilner, JF.Who Lives? Who Dies? Ethical Criteria in Patient Selection. Yale University Press, New Haven, 1990.Google Scholar
Little, JM. Ethics of resource allocation. In: Fearnside, MR, Dooley, BJ, Gorton, MW (eds). Surgery, Ethics and the Law. Blackwell Science Asia, Carlton South, 2000.Google Scholar
Maxwell, R (ed.). Rationing Health Care. Churchill Livingstone, London, 1995.
Pellegrino, ED. Rationing health care: the ethics of medical gatekeeping. J Contemp Health Law Policy 1986; 2: 23–45.Google Scholar
Persad, G, Wertheimer, A, Emanuel, EJ. Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions. Lancet 2009; 373: 423–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×