Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:27:53.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reasonable disagreement and the generally unacceptable: a philosophical analysis of Making Fair Choices

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2015

Benedict E. Rumbold  and
James Wilson
Benedict E. Rumbold*
Affiliation:
Political Science, University College London, UK
James Wilson
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Centre for Philosophy, Justice and Health, UCL, UK
*
*Correspondence to: Benedict E. Rumbold, Department of Political Science, UCL, The Rubin Building, 29/31 Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9QU, UK. Email: b.rumbold@ucl.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article we consider the conclusions and recommendations of the World Health Organisation’s report Making Fair Choices from a philosophical perspective. In particular we reflect on the report’s return to substantive claims about justice in the allocation of health care resources and its argument that certain trade-offs are ‘generally unacceptable’.

Type
Special Section
Information
Health Economics, Policy and Law , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , January 2016 , pp. 91 - 96
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashcroft, R. (2008), ‘Fair process and the redundancy of bioethics: a polemic’, Public Health Ethics, 1(1): 3–9.Google Scholar
Daniels, N. (1994), ‘Four unsolved rationing problems: a challenge’, The Hastings Center Report, 24(4): 27–29.Google Scholar
Daniels, N. (2008), Just Health: Meeting Health Needs Fairly, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Daniels, N. and Sabin, J. E. (2008), Setting Limits Fairly: Learning to Share Resources for Health, 2nd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holm, S. (1998), ‘Goodbye to the simple solutions: the second phase of priority setting in health care’, British Medical Journal, 317: 1000–1002.Google Scholar
World Health Organisation (WHO) (2014), Making Fair Choices on the Path to Universal Health Coverage, Geneva: World Health Organisation. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/112671/1/9789241507158_eng.pdf?ua=1 [27 July 2014].Google Scholar