配给、责任与可责性:医疗配给责任敏感政策的伦理评价。

IF 1.1 4区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS
Xavier Symons, Reginald Chua
{"title":"配给、责任与可责性:医疗配给责任敏感政策的伦理评价。","authors":"Xavier Symons,&nbsp;Reginald Chua","doi":"10.1353/ken.2021.0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Several ethicists have defended the use of responsibility-based criteria in healthcare rationing. Yet in this article we outline two challenges to the implementation of responsibility-based healthcare rationing policies. These two challenges are, namely, that responsibility for past behavior can diminish as an agent changes, and that blame can come apart from responsibility. These challenges suggest that it is more difficult to hold someone responsible for health related actions than proponents of responsibility-sensitive healthcare policies suggest. We close by discussing public health policies that could function as an alternative to contentious, responsibility-sensitive rationing policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":46167,"journal":{"name":"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal","volume":"31 1","pages":"53-76"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/ken.2021.0004","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rationing, Responsibility and Blameworthiness: An Ethical Evaluation of Responsibility-Sensitive Policies for Healthcare Rationing.\",\"authors\":\"Xavier Symons,&nbsp;Reginald Chua\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/ken.2021.0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Several ethicists have defended the use of responsibility-based criteria in healthcare rationing. Yet in this article we outline two challenges to the implementation of responsibility-based healthcare rationing policies. These two challenges are, namely, that responsibility for past behavior can diminish as an agent changes, and that blame can come apart from responsibility. These challenges suggest that it is more difficult to hold someone responsible for health related actions than proponents of responsibility-sensitive healthcare policies suggest. We close by discussing public health policies that could function as an alternative to contentious, responsibility-sensitive rationing policies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46167,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"53-76\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/ken.2021.0004\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2021.0004\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2021.0004","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

一些伦理学家为在医疗配给中使用基于责任的标准进行了辩护。然而,在本文中,我们概述了实施基于责任的医疗配给政策所面临的两个挑战。这两个挑战是,对过去行为的责任可以随着代理人的改变而减少,指责可以从责任中分离出来。这些挑战表明,要让某人对与健康有关的行动负责,比责任敏感型医疗保健政策的支持者所认为的要困难得多。最后,我们讨论了公共卫生政策,这些政策可以替代有争议的、责任敏感的定量配给政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rationing, Responsibility and Blameworthiness: An Ethical Evaluation of Responsibility-Sensitive Policies for Healthcare Rationing.

Several ethicists have defended the use of responsibility-based criteria in healthcare rationing. Yet in this article we outline two challenges to the implementation of responsibility-based healthcare rationing policies. These two challenges are, namely, that responsibility for past behavior can diminish as an agent changes, and that blame can come apart from responsibility. These challenges suggest that it is more difficult to hold someone responsible for health related actions than proponents of responsibility-sensitive healthcare policies suggest. We close by discussing public health policies that could function as an alternative to contentious, responsibility-sensitive rationing policies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal offers a scholarly forum for diverse views on major issues in bioethics, such as analysis and critique of principlism, feminist perspectives in bioethics, the work of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, active euthanasia, genetics, health care reform, and organ transplantation. Each issue includes "Scope Notes," an overview and extensive annotated bibliography on a specific topic in bioethics, and "Bioethics Inside the Beltway," a report written by a Washington insider updating bioethics activities on the federal level.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信