Additional Information In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content: But, whereas he regards justice as important, he does not think it is the whole of morality.
Inequalities in Health, Inequalities in Health Care: Four Generations of Discussion about Justice and Cost-effectiveness Analysis Since at least the s, bioethics has addressed questions of justice in health policy. Much of the discussion has focused on health care, including the question of what role, if any, the techniques of cost-effectiveness analysis should play in the allocation of health care resources.
In our view, this discussion has evolved through four generations of perspective and analysis, each asking different questions and seeking different solutions. In this paper, we use these four generations of commentary as a vehicle for exploring ethical questions about cost-effectiveness analysis, including some of the limitations of the standard arguments made against CEA based on its distributive implications.
We then explore newer alternatives in CEA, including what is now called cost-value analysis, designed in response to these moral arguments. We also use the generational device to illustrate the importance of focusing on inequalities in health, and not merely health care, a view with early roots in "first generation" questions about a right to health.
First generation In the first generation of commentary, the initial questions of interest were: Is there a moral right to health? Is there a moral right to health care? Despite the inclusion of language about a right to health in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the bioethics literature did not much pursue the question of a moral right to health.
Inequalities in health were viewed as unfair by at least some commentators, particularly when these inequalities were associated with poverty or environmental or occupational hazards.
However, because health did not fit the model of a good or service that societies could in some strict sense distribute, a right to health was viewed as a conceptually confused and impractical objective. Instead, interest focused on whether there is a right to health care and, and if so, how to understand the nature of the entitlement grounded by the right.
That is, to what medical goods and services are individuals entitled? The answers to these questions followed predictable lines in moral theory.
Libertarian, utilitarian and egalitarian views emerged and were never reconciled. In many respects, we have never fully left this original debate, as these divides continue to resonate in subsequent generations of discussion. Libertarians rejected a moral right to health care.
The job of justice, they argued, is to protect individual liberty and property rights, not to bring about some patterned conception of distribution. At the same time, however, many libertarians made room within their theories for some role for the state usually vouchers in ensuring that the poor and unfortunate have access to a decent minimum of health care services Engelhardt ; Lomasky Commentators who argued from a family of egalitarian positions, by contrast, all defended an universal moral right to health care.John Rawls (—) John Rawls was arguably the most important political philosopher of the twentieth century.
He wrote a series of highly influential articles in the s and ’60s that helped refocus Anglo-American moral and political philosophy on substantive problems about what we ought to do.
This article is concerned with social and political equality. In its prescriptive usage, ‘equality’ is a loaded and ‘highly contested’ concept. The fundamental principle of morality — the CI — is none other than the law of an autonomous will. Thus, at the heart of Kant’s moral philosophy is a conception of reason whose reach in practical affairs goes well beyond that of a Humean ‘slave’ to the passions.
STUDY. PLAY. philosophy. means: "love of wisdom" ethics - is from philosophy Morality and religion have been closely tied to one another for thousands of years. Until quite recently, religion was the primary, if not the only, source of morals. basic moral principle of utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism. That is the secret of all culture: it does not provide artificial limbs, wax noses or spectacles—that which can provide these things is, rather, only sham education.
Others reserve morality for the state of virtue while seeing ethics as a code that enables morality. Another way to think about the relationship between ethics and morality is to see ethics as providing a rational basis for morality, that is, ethics provides good reasons for why something is moral.