Article Text
Abstract
This article examines the ethical basis for government involvement in health care. It first provides the case for individual autonomy, focusing on the justifications–particularly ethical ones–for allowing individuals to make their own choices in health care, and to control more of their own resources in doing so. Next, it provides the opposite case–for abridging individual autonomy, and in particular, for redistributing resources from those who are well off to those who are not. The overriding reason for favouring the latter case, which trumps the notion of individual autonomy, is to ensure that individuals who are at a disadvantage have an equal probability of attaining good health.
- Distributive justice
- ethics
- government
- health care
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
-
Thomas Rice, PhD, is Professor in the Department of Health Services, UCLA School of Public Health, Los Angeles, USA.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Rawlsian justice in healthcare: a response to Cox and Fritz
- Integrating philosophy, policy and practice to create a just and fair health service
- Pharmacist conscience clauses and access to oral contraceptives
- Can antibiotic use be both just and sustainable… or only more or less so?
- Herpes genitalis and the philosopher's stance
- Which strings attached: ethical considerations for selecting appropriate conditionalities in conditional cash transfer programmes
- Individual and community level predictors of women’s autonomy in health care decision-making among youth in East African countries: a multilevel analysis
- Age rationing and prudential lifespan account in Norman Daniels’ Just health
- Is supervised community treatment ethically justifiable?
- In defence of our model for just healthcare systems: why an explicit philosophy is needed in addition to the law, and how Scanlon helps derive just policies