Abstract
Harris argues that if QALYs are used only 50% of the population will be eligible for survival, whereas if random methods of allocation are used 100% will be eligible. We argue that this involves an equivocation in the use of "eligible", and provides no support for the random method. There is no advantage in having a 100% chance of being "eligible" for survival behind a veil of ignorance if you still only have a 50% chance of survival once the veil is lifted. A 100% chance of a 50% chance is still only a 50% chance. We also argue that Harris provides no plausible way of dealing with the criticism that his random method of allocation may result in the squandering of resources.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Harris J. Would Aristotle have played Russian roulette? J Med Ethics. 1996 Aug;22(4):209–215. doi: 10.1136/jme.22.4.209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]