@article {Miller Tate131, author = {Alex James Miller Tate}, title = {Unweighted lotteries and compounding injustice: reply to Schmidt et al }, volume = {48}, number = {2}, pages = {131--132}, year = {2022}, doi = {10.1136/medethics-2021-107395}, publisher = {Institute of Medical Ethics}, abstract = {I argue that Schmidt et al, while correctly diagnosing the serious racial inequity in current ventilator rationing procedures, misidentify a corresponding racial inequity issue in alternative {\textquoteleft}unweighted lottery{\textquoteright} procedures. Unweighted lottery procedures do not {\textquoteleft}compound{\textquoteright} (in the relevant sense) prior structural injustices. However, Schmidt et al do gesture towards a real problem with unweighted lotteries that previous advocates of lottery-based allocation procedures, myself included, have previously overlooked. On the basis that there are independent reasons to prefer lottery-based allocation of scarce lifesaving healthcare resources, I develop this idea, arguing that unweighted lottery procedures fail to satisfy healthcare providers{\textquoteright} duty to prevent unjust population-level health outcomes, and thus that lotteries weighted in favour of Black individuals (and others who experience serious health injustice) are to be preferred.}, issn = {0306-6800}, URL = {https://jme.bmj.com/content/48/2/131}, eprint = {https://jme.bmj.com/content/48/2/131.full.pdf}, journal = {Journal of Medical Ethics} }