Health Care Rationing

Paper Summary:

This paper explains that the ethical issue involves whether it is better if fewer Americans profit with a greater amount of health resource allocation or if the majority benefit to a lesser degree for equity in health care benefits. The author evaluates the rights-based Utilitarian theory that states the "happiness" of the greatest number of individuals can be applied to the clinical ethics perspective of health care rationing, thus taking an Aristotelian position that the decision maker should base his or her ethical values on patient well-being rather than established guidelines prepared by others external to the case. The paper concludes that, by rationing heath care, civil rights are violated in that health is being placed at risk; therefore, the policy of omitting that which could potentially save someone's life lacks in ethical justification.

From the Paper:

"In addition to the ethical debate surrounding rationing, there exists a major conflict with the essay's argument. The essayist writes, "The miracles of medicine have outpaced the ability to pay for them," discriminating against advancing medical technologies that he views as unnecessary if less medical care is provided. If "innovation grows faster than our ability to pay for it," is his justification to support rationing, then he is also advocating reducing expenditures in the medical research and development field, forcing us into a medical standstill. Given this to be the case, then medical rationing could work nicely since there would be fewer technologies to argue over providing to patients."

More papers on Health Care Rationing:

• Term Paper # 122818 : "Rationing Health Care"
• Analytical Essay # 12703 : "Health Care Rationing"
• Argumentative Essay # 59469 : "Health Care Privatization"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: