Article info
Rationing and life-saving treatments: should identifiable patients have higher priority?
Citation
Rationing and life-saving treatments: should identifiable patients have higher priority?
Publication history
- First published June 1, 2001.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Copyright 2001 by the Journal of Medical Ethics
Other content recommended for you
- Does NICE apply the rule of rescue in its approach to highly specialised technologies?
- Public healthcare resource allocation and the Rule of Rescue
- Settling for second best: when should doctors agree to parental demands for suboptimal medical treatment?
- ‘Empathy counterbalancing’ to mitigate the ‘identified victim effect’? Ethical reflections on cognitive debiasing strategies to increase support for healthcare priority setting
- Donor blood screening and moral responsibility: how safe should blood be?
- Birth order of twins and risk of perinatal death related to delivery in England, Northern Ireland, and Wales, 1994-2003: retrospective cohort study
- Rescuing the duty to rescue
- Tragic choices in health care: lessons from the Child B case
- Joint associations of accelerometer-measured physical activity and sedentary time with all-cause mortality: a harmonised meta-analysis in more than 44 000 middle-aged and older individuals
- Life expectancy as a summary of mortality in a population: statistical considerations and suitability for use by health authorities