In this paper I outline and explore some problems in the way that the Nuffield Council of Bioethics’ report Public Health: Ethical Issues (2007) presents its ‘Intervention Ladder’. They see the metaphor of a ladder both as capturing key normative priorities and as making a real and important contribution to ethical policymaking in public health. In this paper I argue that the intervention ladder is not a useful model for thinking about policy decisions, that it is likely to produce poor decisions and that it is incompatible with the report's stated approach to relevant public health policy values.
- Public Health Ethics
- Public Policy
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Health law and policy: The scope and bounds of liberty?
- Introduction: Special Issue on the Ethics of Incentives in Healthcare
- Spoonful of honey or a gallon of vinegar? A conditional COVID-19 vaccination policy for front-line healthcare workers
- Salvaging the concept of nudge
- Informed consent in cluster randomised trials: new and common ethical challenges
- Obesity, paternalism and fairness
- Norms, rules and policy tools: understanding Article 5.3 as an instrument of tobacco control governance
- Clarifying the best interests standard: the elaborative and enumerative strategies in public policy-making
- Harmful rights-doing? The perceived problem of liberal paradigms and public health
- Beyond the usual suspects: using political science to enhance public health policy making