Article Text
Abstract
At the 5th International Conference on Priorities in Health Care in Wellington, New Zealand, 2004, one resonating theme was that for priority setting to be effective, it has to include clinicians in both decision making and the enforcement of those decisions. There was, however, a disturbing undertone to this theme, namely that doctors, in particular, were unjustifiably thwarting good systems of prioritising scarce healthcare resources. This undertone seems unfair precisely because doctors may, and in some cases do, feel obligated by their professional ethics to remain uninvolved either in deciding priorities and in some cases in enforcing them. I will argue that the professional role of a doctor ought not be considered inconsistent with the role of a priority setter or enforcer, as long as one crucial element is in place, a rationally coherent and broadly justifiable regime for prioritising healthcare. Given this I conclude both that prioritisation and doctoring are not incompatible under certain conditions, and that the education of healthcare professionals ought to include material on distributive justice in healthcare.
- A4R, accountability for reasonableness
- prioritisation
- healthcare resources
- professional ethics
- fiduciary relationships
- scarcity
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Clinical governance development: learning from the New Zealand experience
- Ethics and opportunity costs: have NICE grasped the ethics of priority setting?
- Priority setting in cardiac surgery: a survey of decision making and ethical issues
- Conscientious commitment, professional obligations and abortion provision after the reversal of Roe v Wade
- Coronary artery bypass graft surgery: socioeconomic inequalities in access and in 30 day mortality. A population-based study in Rome, Italy
- Imperfect by design: the problematic ethics of surgical training
- Access to intensive care unit beds for neurosurgery patients: a qualitative case study
- Protocol for a mixed methods realist evaluation of regional District Health Board groupings in New Zealand
- Medical ethics
- Clinical outcomes after percutaneous or surgical revascularisation of unprotected left main coronary artery-related acute myocardial infarction: a single-centre experience