@article {Dresslermedethics-2017-104717, author = {Gabrielle Dressler and Sarah A Kelly}, title = {Ethical implications of medical crowdfunding: the case of Charlie Gard}, elocation-id = {medethics-2017-104717}, year = {2018}, doi = {10.1136/medethics-2017-104717}, publisher = {Institute of Medical Ethics}, abstract = {Patients are increasingly turning to medical crowdfunding as a way to cover their healthcare costs. In the case of Charlie Gard, an infant born with encephalomyopathic mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome, crowdfunding was used to finance experimental nucleoside therapy. Although this treatment was not provided in the end, we will argue that the success of the Gard family{\textquoteright}s crowdfunding campaign reveals a number of potential ethical concerns. First, this case shows that crowdfunding can change the way in which communal healthcare resources are allocated. Second, within the UK{\textquoteright}s National Health Service, healthcare is ostensibly not a market resource; thus, permitting crowdfunding introduces market norms that could commodify healthcare. Third, pressures inherent to receiving funds from external parties may threaten the ability of patients-cum-recipients to voluntarily consent to treatment. We conclude that while crowdfunding itself is not unethical, its use can have unforeseen consequences that may influence conceptions of healthcare and how it is delivered.}, issn = {0306-6800}, URL = {https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2018/05/04/medethics-2017-104717}, eprint = {https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2018/05/04/medethics-2017-104717.full.pdf}, journal = {Journal of Medical Ethics} }