About: Proposals for allocating scarce lifesaving resources in the face of the covid-19 pandemic have aligned in some ways and conflicted in others. This paper attempts a kind of priority setting in addressing these conflicts. In the first part, we identify points on which we do not believe that reasonable people should differ—even if they do. These are (a) the inadequacy of traditional clinical ethics to address priority-setting in a pandemic; (b) the relevance of saving lives; (c) the flaws of first-come, first-served allocation; (d) the relevance of post-episode survival; (e) the difference between age and other life-expectancy expectancy; and (f) the need to avoid quality-of-life judgments. In the second part, we lay out some positions on which reasonable people can and do differ. These include (a) conflicts between maximizing benefits and priority to the worst off; (b) role-based priority; and (c) whether patients’ existing lifesaving resources should be subject to redistribution.   Goto Sponge  NotDistinct  Permalink

An Entity of Type : fabio:Abstract, within Data Space : wasabi.inria.fr associated with source document(s)

AttributesValues
type
value
  • Proposals for allocating scarce lifesaving resources in the face of the covid-19 pandemic have aligned in some ways and conflicted in others. This paper attempts a kind of priority setting in addressing these conflicts. In the first part, we identify points on which we do not believe that reasonable people should differ—even if they do. These are (a) the inadequacy of traditional clinical ethics to address priority-setting in a pandemic; (b) the relevance of saving lives; (c) the flaws of first-come, first-served allocation; (d) the relevance of post-episode survival; (e) the difference between age and other life-expectancy expectancy; and (f) the need to avoid quality-of-life judgments. In the second part, we lay out some positions on which reasonable people can and do differ. These include (a) conflicts between maximizing benefits and priority to the worst off; (b) role-based priority; and (c) whether patients’ existing lifesaving resources should be subject to redistribution.
subject
  • Senescence
  • 2019 disasters in China
  • 2019 health disasters
part of
is abstract of
is hasSource of
Faceted Search & Find service v1.13.91 as of Mar 24 2020


Alternative Linked Data Documents: Sponger | ODE     Content Formats:       RDF       ODATA       Microdata      About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data]
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3229 as of Jul 10 2020, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Single-Server Edition (94 GB total memory)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2025 OpenLink Software