Abstract
Health care systems across the world are unable to afford the best treatment for all patients in all situations. Choices have to be made. One key ethical issue that arises for health authorities is whether the principle of the "rule of rescue" should be adopted or rejected. According to this principle more funding should be available in order to save lives of identifiable, compared with unidentifiable, individuals. Six reasons for giving such priority to identifiable individuals are considered. All are rejected. It is concluded that the principle of the rule of rescue should not be used in determining the allocation of health resources.
Key Words: "Rule of rescue" • priority setting • resource allocation • rationing • justice
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (108.7 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Daniels Norman, Sabin James. Limits to health care: fair procedures, democratic deliberation, and the legitimacy problem for insurers. Philos Public Aff. 1997 Fall;26(4):303–350. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.1997.tb00082.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hope T., Hicks N., Reynolds D. J., Crisp R., Griffiths S. Rationing and the health authority. BMJ. 1998 Oct 17;317(7165):1067–1069. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7165.1067. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Savulescu J. The cost of refusing treatment and equality of outcome. J Med Ethics. 1998 Aug;24(4):231–236. doi: 10.1136/jme.24.4.231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Williams A. QALYS and ethics: a health economist's perspective. Soc Sci Med. 1996 Dec;43(12):1795–1804. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(96)00082-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- du Boulay C. Revalidation for doctors in the United Kingdom: the end or the beginning? BMJ. 2000 Jun 3;320(7248):1490–1490. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7248.1490. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]