Abstract
Medical resource allocation is a controversial topic, because in the end it prioritises some peoples’ medical problems over those of others. This is less controversial when there is a clear clinical reason for such a prioritisation, but when such a reason is not available people might perceive it as deeming certain individuals more important than others. This article looks at the role of social utility in medical resource allocation, in a situation where the clinical outcome would be identical if either person received the treatment. This situation is explored with a focus on the United Kingdom, but its conclusions have wider applications to any system where healthcare is tax-payer funded. The article proposes an experience adjusted life years system, and discusses its strengths and weaknesses.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 561–568 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy |
Volume | 21 |
Issue number | 4 |
Early online date | 1 Mar 2018 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Dec 2018 |
Keywords
- health care resources
- age
- social utility
- decision-making
- resource allocation
- fair innings