Priority setting and personal health responsibility: an analysis of Norwegian key policy documents

Background The idea that individuals are responsible for their health has been the focus of debate in the theoretical literature and in its concrete application to healthcare policy in many countries. Controversies persist regarding the form, substance and fairness of allocating health responsibilit...

Description complète

Enregistré dans:  
Détails bibliographiques
Auteurs: Traina, Gloria (Auteur) ; Feiring, Eli (Auteur)
Type de support: Électronique Article
Langue:Anglais
Vérifier la disponibilité: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Publié: 2022
Dans: Journal of medical ethics
Année: 2022, Volume: 48, Numéro: 1, Pages: 39-45
Accès en ligne: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002c 4500
001 1918645744
003 DE-627
005 20250226145835.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 250226s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/medethics-2019-105612  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1918645744 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1918645744 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Traina, Gloria  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (orcid)0000-0003-1068-4509  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Priority setting and personal health responsibility: an analysis of Norwegian key policy documents 
264 1 |c 2022 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Background The idea that individuals are responsible for their health has been the focus of debate in the theoretical literature and in its concrete application to healthcare policy in many countries. Controversies persist regarding the form, substance and fairness of allocating health responsibility to the individual, particularly in universal, need-based healthcare systems. Objective To examine how personal health responsibility has been framed and rationalised in Norwegian key policy documents on priority setting. Methods Documents issued or published by the Ministry of Health and Care Services between 1987 and 2018 were thematically analysed (n=14). We developed a predefined conceptual framework that guided the analysis. The framework included: (1) the subject and object of responsibility, (2) the level of conceptual abstraction, (3) temporality, (4) normative justificatory arguments and (5) objections to the application of personal health responsibility. Results As an additional criterion, personal health responsibility has been interpreted as relevant if: (A) the patient’s harmful behaviour is repeated after receiving treatment (retrospectively), and if (B) the success of the treatment is conditional on the patient’s behavioural change (prospectively). When discussed as a retrospective criterion, considerations of reciprocal fairness have been dominant. When discussed as a prospective criterion, the expected benefit of treatment justified its relevance. Conclusion Personal health responsibility appears to challenge core values of equality, inclusion and solidarity in the Norwegian context and has been repeatedly rejected as a necessary criterion for priority setting. However, the responsibility criterion seems to have some relevance in particular priority setting decisions. 
700 1 |a Feiring, Eli  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (orcid)0000-0001-5280-1051  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 48(2022), 1, Seite 39-45  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:48  |g year:2022  |g number:1  |g pages:39-45 
856 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/early/2020/03/01/medethics-2019-105612.full.pdf  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [deprecated] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2019-105612  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/48/1/39  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4673473566 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1918645744 
LOK |0 005 20250226144439 
LOK |0 008 250226||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixzo  |a ixrk 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw