Douglas Thomas
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2020 Apr;29(2):192-195. doi: 10.1017/S0963180119000987.
Christine Clavien and Samia Hurst1 (henceforth C-H) make at least three valuable contributions to the literature on responsibility and healthcare. They offer an admirably clear and workable set of criteria for determining a patient's degree of responsibility for her health condition; they deploy those criteria to cast doubt on the view that patients with lifestyle-related conditions are typically significantly responsible for their conditions; and they outline several practical difficulties that would be raised by any attempt to introduce responsibility-sensitive healthcare funding. I am sympathetic to the general thrust of their argument, share-at least tentatively-their policy conclusions, and was persuaded by much of the detail of their argument. However, I do have three critical comments.
克里斯汀·克拉维恩和萨米亚·赫斯特（以下简称C-H）至少为有关责任与医疗保健的文献做出了三项有价值的贡献。他们提出了一套清晰且可行的标准，用以确定患者对自身健康状况的责任程度；他们运用这些标准，对那种认为患有与生活方式相关疾病的患者通常要对其病情承担重大责任的观点提出质疑；并且他们概述了任何试图引入对责任敏感的医疗保健资金所引发的若干实际困难。我赞同他们论点的总体主旨，至少暂时认同他们的政策结论，并且被他们论点的诸多细节所说服。然而，我确实有三点批判性的看法。
