University of Maryland, Department of Philosophy, College Park, MD 20742, USA.
Am J Bioeth. 2010 Apr;10(4):37-45. doi: 10.1080/15265160903581718.
The allocation of scarce health care resources such as flu treatment or organs for transplant presents stark problems of distributive justice. Persad, Wertheimer, and Emanuel have recently proposed a novel system for such allocation. Their "complete lives system" incorporates several principles, including ones that prescribe saving the most lives, preserving the most life-years, and giving priority to persons between 15 and 40 years old. This paper argues that the system lacks adequate moral foundations. Persad and colleagues' defense of giving priority to those between 15 and 40 leaves them open to the charge that they discriminate unfairly against children. Second, the paper contends that the complete lives system fails to provide meaningful practical guidance in central cases, since it contains no method for balancing its principles when they conflict. Finally, the paper proposes a new method for balancing principles of saving the most lives and maximizing life-years.
稀缺医疗资源(如流感治疗或器官移植)的分配存在明显的分配正义问题。Persad、Wertheimer 和 Emanuel 最近提出了一种新的分配系统。他们的“完整生命系统”包含了几个原则,包括拯救最多生命、延长最多寿命和优先考虑 15 至 40 岁的人。本文认为该系统缺乏足够的道德基础。Persad 及其同事为优先考虑 15 至 40 岁的人辩护,这使他们面临不公平地歧视儿童的指控。其次,本文认为完整生命系统在核心案例中未能提供有意义的实际指导,因为当它的原则发生冲突时,它没有提供平衡这些原则的方法。最后,本文提出了一种新的平衡拯救最多生命和延长最多寿命原则的方法。