Fair Process and the Redundancy of Bioethics: A Polemic

作者: R. Ashcroft

DOI: 10.1093/PHE/PHN004

关键词:

摘要: Recent doctrine in both national and international organisations concerned with public health planning resource allocation has it that direct ethical justification of substantive decisions is so difficult as to be impossible. Instead, we should agree on criteria procedural justice reach whose lies how they are arrived at, rather than any the ground moral principles. In this polemical article, I argue amounts a serious dereliction intellectual duty part bioethics community. Our role these settings produce defend best arguments can. Failing do makes bioethicists at redundant worst leads us seriously defective conclusions. The argument illustrated by analysis frameworks for under UNAIDS ‘3 5’ programme pandemic influenza planning.

参考文章(6)
John M Taurek, Should the numbers count Philosophy & Public Affairs. ,vol. 6, pp. 293- 316 ,(1977)
Partha Dasgupta, Utilitarianism, information and rights Utilitarianism and Beyond. pp. 199- 218 ,(1982) , 10.1017/CBO9780511611964.012
Alison K Thompson, Karen Faith, Jennifer L Gibson, Ross EG Upshur, Pandemic influenza preparedness: an ethical framework to guide decision-making. BMC Medical Ethics. ,vol. 7, pp. 12- ,(2006) , 10.1186/1472-6939-7-12
Richard E. Ashcroft, Fair Rationing is Essentially Local: An Argument for Postcode Prescribing Health Care Analysis. ,vol. 14, pp. 135- 144 ,(2006) , 10.1007/S10728-006-0021-9