Cost-Effectiveness and the Avoidance of Discrimination in Healthcare: Can We Have Both?

Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen*

*Corresponding author af dette arbejde

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

1 Citationer (Scopus)

Abstract

Many ethical theorists believe that a given distribution of healthcare is morally justified only if (1) it is cost-effective and (2) it does not discriminate against older adults and disabled people. However, if (3) cost-effectiveness involves maximizing the number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) added by a given unit of healthcare resource, or cost, it seems the pursuit of cost-effectiveness will inevitably discriminate against older adults and disabled patients. I show why this trilemma is harder to escape than some theorists think. We cannot avoid it by using age- or disability-weighted QALY scores, for example. I then explain why there is no sense of discrimination on which discrimination is both unjust, and thus something healthcare rationing must avoid, and something cost-effective healthcare rationing inevitably involves. I go on to argue that many of the reasons we have for not favoring rationing that maximizes QALYs outside the healthcare context apply in healthcare as well. Thus, claim (1) above is dubious.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftCambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics
Vol/bind32
Nummer2
Sider (fra-til)202-215
Antal sider14
ISSN0963-1801
DOI
StatusUdgivet - apr. 2023

Fingeraftryk

Dyk ned i forskningsemnerne om 'Cost-Effectiveness and the Avoidance of Discrimination in Healthcare: Can We Have Both?'. Sammen danner de et unikt fingeraftryk.

Citationsformater