The ethical canary: narrow reflective equilibrium as a source of moral justification in healthcare priority-setting

Healthcare priority-setting institutions have good reason to want to demonstrate that their decisions are morally justified—and those who contribute to and use the health service have good reason to hope for the same. However, finding a moral basis on which to evaluate healthcare priority-setting is...

ver descrição completa

Na minha lista:  
Detalhes bibliográficos
Authors: Charlton, Victoria (Author) ; DiStefano, Michael J. (Author)
Tipo de documento: Recurso Electrónico Artigo
Idioma:Inglês
Verificar disponibilidade: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Publicado em: 2024
Em: Journal of medical ethics
Ano: 2024, Volume: 50, Número: 12, Páginas: 835-840
Acesso em linha: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002c 4500
001 1918815186
003 DE-627
005 20250228114356.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 250228s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/jme-2023-109467  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1918815186 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1918815186 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Charlton, Victoria  |e VerfasserIn  |0 (orcid)0000-0002-7407-2627  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The ethical canary: narrow reflective equilibrium as a source of moral justification in healthcare priority-setting 
264 1 |c 2024 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Healthcare priority-setting institutions have good reason to want to demonstrate that their decisions are morally justified—and those who contribute to and use the health service have good reason to hope for the same. However, finding a moral basis on which to evaluate healthcare priority-setting is difficult. Substantive approaches are vulnerable to reasonable disagreement about the appropriate grounds for allocating resources, while procedural approaches may be indeterminate and insufficient to ensure a just distribution. In this paper, we set out a complementary, coherence-based approach to the evaluation of healthcare priority-setting. Drawing on Rawls, we argue that an institutional priority-setter’s claim to moral justification can be assessed, in part, based on the extent to which its many normative commitments are mutually supportive and free from dissonance; that is, on the ability to establish narrow reflective equilibrium across the normative content of a priority-setter’s policy and practice. While we do not suggest that the establishment of such equilibrium is sufficient for moral justification, we argue that failure to do so might—like the proverbial canary in the coalmine—act as a generalised warning that something is awry. We offer a theoretical argument in support of this view and briefly outline a practical method for systematically examining coherence across priority-setting policy and practice. 
700 1 |a DiStefano, Michael J.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 50(2024), 12, Seite 835-840  |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:50  |g year:2024  |g number:12  |g pages:835-840 
856 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/early/2024/02/19/jme-2023-109467.full.pdf  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [deprecated] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2023-109467  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/50/12/835  |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 4675117910 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1918815186 
LOK |0 005 20250228114356 
LOK |0 008 250228||||||||||||||||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