Rights to Health Care and Distributive Justice: Programmatic Worries

Resource scarcity forces health care systems to set priorities and navigate trade-offs in how they choose to fund different services. Distributive justice principles can help guide health systems to fairly allocate scarce resources in a society. In most countries, mental health care and psychotherapy, in particular, tend to be under-prioritized even though psychotherapy can be an effective treatment for mental health disorders. To create ethical funding systems that support appropriate access to psychotherapy, health care funding systems must consider how they allocate and distribute health care resources through health care financing, coverage criteria, and reimbursement mechanisms. Five health care systems are assessed according to how they finance and reimburse psychotherapy. These health systems use various and often pluralistic approaches that encompass differing distributive justice principles. Although distribution priorities and values may differ, fair and transparent processes that involve all key stakeholders are vital for making ethical decisions on access and distribution.

Download Full-text

Classical Distributive Justice and the European Healthcare System: Rethinking the Foundations of European Health Care in an Age of Crises

The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine ◽

10.1093/jmp/jhu078 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 40 (2) ◽

pp. 190-200 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

S. Bauzon

Keyword(s):

Health Care ◽

Distributive Justice ◽

Healthcare System ◽

European Healthcare ◽

European Health

Download Full-text

Investigating Public Values in Health Care Priority – Chileans´ Preference for National Health Care

10.21203/rs.3.rs-78030/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Alicia Nunez ◽

Chunhuei Chi

Keyword(s):

Health Care ◽

Distributive Justice ◽

National Health ◽

Priority Setting ◽

Healthcare Access ◽

Large Population ◽

Population Sample ◽

Survey Method ◽

National Health Care ◽

Doctor Communication

Abstract Background: This study aims to assess preferences and values for priority setting in healthcare in Chile through an original and innovative survey method. Based on the answers from a previous survey that look into the barriers the Chilean population face, this study considers the preferences of the communities overcoming those barriers. As a result six programs were identified: (1) new infrastructure, (2) better healthcare coverage, (3) increasing physicians/specialists, (4) new informatics systems, (5) new awareness healthcare programs, and (6) improving availability of drugs. Methods: We applied an innovative survey method for sample subjects to prioritize these programs by their opinion and by allocating resources. The survey also asked people´s preferences for a distributive justice principle for healthcare to guide priority setting of services in Chile. The survey was conducted with a sample of 1,142 individuals. Results: More than half of the interviewees (56.4%) indicated a single program as their first priority, while 20.1% selected two of them as their first priority. To increase the number of doctors/specialists and improve patient-doctor communication was the program that obtained the highest priority. The second and third priorities correspond to improving and investing in infrastructure and expanding the coverage of healthcare insurances. Additionally, the results showed that equal access for equal healthcare is the principle selected by the majority to guide distributive justice for the Chilean health system. Conclusions: This study shade lights on how a large population sample can participate in major decision making of national health policies, including making a choice of a distributive justice principle. Despite the complexity of the questions asked, this study demonstrated that with an innovative method and adequate guidance, average population is capable of engaging in expressing their preferences and values. Results of this study provide policy-makers useful community generated information for prioritizing policies to improve healthcare access.

Download Full-text

Economically Unsustainable Drugs and Intergenerational Health Care Justice

Studia Universitatis Babeş-Bolyai Bioethica ◽

10.24193/subbbioethica.2021.spiss.101 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 66 (Special Issue) ◽

pp. 151-151

Author(s):

Dario Sacchini ◽

◽

Pietro Refolo ◽

Antonio G. Spagnolo ◽

◽

...

Keyword(s):

Health Care ◽

Distributive Justice ◽

Point Of View ◽

Economic Evaluations ◽

Vast Amount ◽

Recent Introduction ◽

Long Run ◽

Theories Of Justice ◽

Health Care Justice ◽

Effective Drugs

"Introduction. The recent introduction of extremely effective drugs in treating diseases, but associated with exorbitant costs raised several issues in terms of distributive justice. However, in this debate justice is widely thought in intragenerational terms. The work will explore the concept of intergenerational health care justice, in particular the argument, often used to justify the introduction of this type of drugs, according to which the vast amount of money spent now will allow to have savings in the long run. The recent introduction of some drugs that are extremely effective in treating diseases but associated with exorbitant costs, raised several issues in terms of distributive justice. However, in this debate justice is widely thought in intragenerational terms. Methods: A review of key documents on intergenerational justice was conducted, followed by a nonsystematic review of peer-reviewed and gray literature. The existing material was analyzed and a draft manuscript was prepared and discussed. Some experts carried out the revision of the manuscript until consensus was reached. Results: The concept of intergenerational health care justice has never been well explored. From an intergenerational point of view, the argument – which is often supported by pharmaco-economic evaluations – according to which the vast amount of money spent now for this type of drugs will allow to have savings in the long run is not in itself coherent with the main theories of justice. Conclusions: Considerations that are extrinsic to the assumptions of the main theories of justice are needed in order to justify the argument above. "

Download Full-text