Buetow Stephen
Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Health Care Anal. 2003 Jun;11(2):151-60. doi: 10.1023/A:1025605113670.
New Zealand and United Kingdom governments have set new directives for increased consultation with the public about health care. Set against a legacy of modest success with past engagement with public consultations, this paper considers potentially adverse ethical implications of the new directives. Drawing on experiences from New Zealand and the United Kingdom, and on an Orthodox Jewish perspective, the paper seeks to answer two questions: What conditions can compromise the ethics of public consultation? How can the public respond ethically to consultation? In answering these questions, the paper considers how Orthodox Judaism, as a specific positive morality, can aid the development of public policy. It is suggested that an Orthodox Jewish perspective does not require limiting the content of public consultations and helps to define a common procedural morality binding Jews and non-Jews. This procedural morality requires avoiding two conditions that, as shown from Jewish texts, make public consultation unethical. These are "overpreparation" and "underpreparation." Members of the public who deem a consultation unethical should give feedback not on the proposal but on the conditions they perceive to prevent the consulting party from considering their viewpoints on the proposal.
