Stumpf Sabine, Raspe Heiner
Seniorprofessur für Bevölkerungsmedizin, Universität zu Lübeck.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2012;106(6):418-25. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2012.06.009. Epub 2012 Jun 28.
The German debate on prioritisation in medicine is getting well under way. This development has raised the question of which substantial and procedural criteria should be used to guide fair and legitimate prioritisation. It seems to be obvious that in a pluralist, democratic society citizens should be involved in such a discussion. But which is the adequate method, and what is the potential of citizen participation? In this paper we compare the results of a regional citizens' conference on prioritisation in medicine with various European reports on principles and criteria for prioritisation, and thereby aim to identify the conference members'contributions to the German debate on prioritisation criteria. The results of this exemplary deliberative event can provide hints towards the general potential of discursive participation. (As supplied by publisher).
德国关于医学资源分配优先级的讨论正在热烈进行中。这一发展引发了一个问题,即应该使用哪些实质性和程序性标准来指导公平合理的资源分配优先级。在一个多元民主社会中,公民参与这样的讨论似乎是显而易见的。但哪种方法是合适的,公民参与的潜力又是什么?在本文中,我们将一次关于医学资源分配优先级的地区公民会议的结果与欧洲关于资源分配优先级原则和标准的各种报告进行比较,从而旨在确定会议成员对德国关于资源分配优先级标准讨论的贡献。这一具有示范意义的审议活动的结果可以为话语参与的总体潜力提供线索。(由出版商提供)