scholarly journals Brain Drain, Health and Global Justice

Author(s):  
Alex Sager
Keyword(s):  
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 33498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian Brock ◽  
Michael Blake
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
pp. 147775092094661
Author(s):  
Faith Atte

The migration of health-care professionals has often produced morally charged discussions among ethicists, politicians, and policy makers in the migrant-sending and migrant-receiving countries because of its devastating effects on the health of those left behind in the countries of origin.This movement of skilled professionals – their decision to leaving their countries of origin in search of better work environments – has created a phenomenon that has been described as brain drain. Although the migration of health workers continue to bring prosperity to millions of people around the world, they have also evoked hopelessness in many more people. Thus, questions of global justice manifest themselves when it comes to the matters of brain drain and the just distribution of health and healthcare professionals.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Merten Reglitz

AbstractIn her debate with Michael Blake, Gillian Brock sets out to justify emigration restrictions on medical workers from poor states on the basis of their free-riding on the public investment that their states have made in them in form of a publicly funded education. For this purpose, Brock aims to isolate the question of emigration restrictions from the larger question of responsibilities for remedying global inequalities. I argue that this approach is misguided because it is blind to decisive factors at play in the problem of medical brain drain and consequently distorts the different responsibilities this problem generates. Brock’s strategy, if successful, would effectively lead to punishing emigrating workers from poor states for the free-riding and exploitation that is committed by affluent states – which is a counter-intuitive result.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raul Magni-Berton

Recent discussions about global justice have focused on arguments that favor the inclusion of political and social rights within the set of human rights. By doing so, these discussions raise the issue of the existence of specific rights enjoyed exclusively by citizens of a given community. This article deals with the problem of distinguishing between human and citizen rights. Specifically, it proposes a new concept of citizen rights that is based on what I call ‘the stockholder principle’: a principle of solidarity that holds within a specific country. This concept, the paper goes on to argue, is compatible with a broad idea of human rights defined by international law and enforced according to territorial authority. The stockholder principle is further compatible with the psychological concept of citizenship based on a specific collective identity and it leads to fair consequences at the domestic and global levels.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document