Suppr超能文献

质量调整生命年、年龄与公平性。

QALYs, age and fairness.

作者信息

Kappel Klemens, Sandøe Peter

出版信息

Bioethics. 1992 Oct;6(4):297-316. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1992.tb00208.x.

Abstract

... We can therefore conclude that either we should go for equality; and in that case QALYs are unfair because they haven't got enough of an ageist bias. Or we should accept consequentialism; and in that case QALYs have just the right sort of ageist bias. No plausible case can, however, be made for the claim that QALYs have an unfair bias against old people. Other things being equal we ought when distributing resources essential for survival favour the young. This ethical claim can be supported both by reference to equality (the life-time-view) and by reference to consequentialism (and the premises that resources generally will be more useful when given to young people).

摘要

因此,我们可以得出结论:要么我们追求平等,在这种情况下,质量调整生命年是不公平的,因为它们没有足够的年龄歧视倾向;要么我们接受结果主义,在这种情况下,质量调整生命年具有恰当的年龄歧视倾向。然而,对于质量调整生命年对老年人存在不公平偏见这一说法,无法给出合理的论证。在其他条件相同的情况下,我们在分配生存所需资源时应该偏袒年轻人。这一伦理主张既可以依据平等(终身视角)得到支持,也可以依据结果主义(以及资源给予年轻人通常会更有用这一前提)得到支持。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验