The ethics of managed care: a dose of realism.

This article examines the ethics of medical practice under managed care from a pragmatic perspective that gives physicians more useful guidance than existing ethical statements. The article begins by stating the authors' starting premises and framework for constructing a realistic set of ethical principles: namely, that bedside rationing in some form is permissible; that medical ethics derive from physicians' role as healers; that actual agreements usually trump hypothetical ones; that ethical statements are primarily aspirational, not regulatory; and that preserving patient trust is the primary objective. The authors then articulate the following concrete ethical guides: financial incentives should influence physicians to maximize the health of the group of patients under their care; physicians should not enter into incentive arrangements that they would be embarrassed to describe accurately to their patients or that are not in common use in the market; physicians should treat each patient impartially, without regard to source of payment, and in a manner consistent with the physician's own treatment style; if physicians depart from this ideal, they must tell their patients honestly; and it is desirable, although not mandatory, to differentiate medical treatment recommendations from insurance coverage decisions by clearly assigning authority over these different roles and by having physicians to advocate for recommended treatment that is not covered.