The paradox of promoting choice in a collectivist system
The notion of choice and its individualistic underpinnings is fundamentally inconsistent with the collectivist NHS ethos In both the policy1 and academic2 literatures, the issue of extending patient choice in the UK National Health Service (NHS) is currently a much discussed issue. From December 200...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Contributors: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2005
|
| In: |
Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2005, Volume: 31, Issue: 4, Pages: 187 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | The notion of choice and its individualistic underpinnings is fundamentally inconsistent with the collectivist NHS ethos In both the policy1 and academic2 literatures, the issue of extending patient choice in the UK National Health Service (NHS) is currently a much discussed issue. From December 2005—for example, general practitioners (GPs) will be required to offer patients needing elective surgery the choice of five providers at the point of referral.1 Choice is often thought of as an intrinsically good thing; that is, that people value choice in and of itself.3 A probable underlying reason for this belief is that choice is tied in with the notion of individual autonomy, or freedom, a concept that looms large in ethical theories of the good. Beauchamp and Childress—for example, classified respect for … |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1473-4257 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of medical ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1136/jme.2005.011809 |