You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Editorial
The paradox of promoting choice in a collectivist system
  1. A Oliver1,
  2. J G Evans2
  1. 1LSE Health and Social Care, London School of Economics and Political Science
  2. 2Green College, Oxford University
  1. Correspondence to:
 Dr A Oliver
 LSE Health and Social Care, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK; a.j.oliverlse.ac.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2005.011809

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    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.

    The notion of choice and its individualistic underpinnings is fundamentally inconsistent with the collectivist NHS ethos

    In both the policy1 and academic2 literatures, the issue of extending patient choice in the UK National Health Service (NHS) is currently a much discussed issue. From December 2005—for example, general practitioners (GPs) will be required to offer patients needing elective surgery the choice of five providers at the point of referral.1 Choice is often thought of as an intrinsically good thing; that is, that people value choice in and of itself.3 A probable underlying reason for this belief is that choice is tied in with the notion of individual autonomy, or freedom, a concept that looms large in ethical theories of the good. Beauchamp and Childress—for example, classified respect for …

    View Full Text

    Other content recommended for you