Question 1
Other
The soaring cost of health care, the limitations of the economy in paying for
health care, and the growing proportion of the population who are over age 65,
have given rise to serious discussion, at times acrimonious, about the possible
need to or the justice of rationing health care to that age group. A common
definition of rationing is withholding some specific medical treatments
for reasons other than a patient’s desire to have the treatment (e.g., Medicare
not paying for certain treatments for very elderly patients).
In your
discussion, you must, from the perspective of distributive justice, summarize
the major arguments on both sides (the pros and cons) of the issue of whether
health care should be rationed to the elderly. You must also characterize these
arguments according to whether they are primarily libertarian, utilitarian, or
egalitarian in nature. Finally, you will evaluate these arguments from your view
of distributive justice, explaining both how your personal life experiences and
your own libertarian, utilitarian, or egalitarian views influence your
evaluation.
To help you successfully complete this discussion, review the
following required resources:
- Callahan, D., & Nuland, S. B. (2011, June 19). The quagmire: How
American medicine is destroying itself. The New Republic, 242(8),
16-18. Retrieved from the EBSCOhost database. - Rationing by any other name: Reasons for
resisting the push to limit medical care - Should we ration end-of-life care?
[Radio broadcast] - Rationing health care at end of life:
Student handout 3
A min of 300 words
