Response to “A Critique of UNOS Liver Allocation Policy” by Kenneth Einar Himma (CQ Vol 8, No 3)

The critique of the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) liver allocation policy by Kenneth Himma has flaws related to the complexities and evolutionary nature of the field. Recent improvements in transplantation have achieved national attention of this sort. There has been an evolution, unequale...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Burdick, James (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Cambridge Univ. Press 2000
In: Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
Year: 2000, Volume: 9, Issue: 2, Pages: 275-280
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Description
Summary:The critique of the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) liver allocation policy by Kenneth Himma has flaws related to the complexities and evolutionary nature of the field. Recent improvements in transplantation have achieved national attention of this sort. There has been an evolution, unequaled elsewhere in medicine, of a national data set and national rules. The transplant community might have been more effective in communicating the details of this, and the problems associated with organ allocation policy. The novelty and complexity of the new rules understandably can produce misleading conclusions.
ISSN:1469-2147
Contains:Enthalten in: Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1017/S0963180100212139