Suppr超能文献

年龄歧视何时成为年龄选择?

When Is Age Choosing Ageist Discrimination?

出版信息

Hastings Cent Rep. 2021 Jan;51(1):13-15. doi: 10.1002/hast.1205. Epub 2020 Dec 15.

Abstract

When the Covid-19 pandemic reached the United States in spring 2020, many states and hospitals announced crisis standards of care plans that used age as a categorical exclusion criterion. Such age choosing was quickly flagged as discriminatory, and so some states and hospitals shifted to embedding age as a tiebreaker deeper in their plans. Different rationales were given for using age as a tiebreaker: that younger patients were more likely to survive than older patients, that saving younger patients would save more life years, and that younger patients deserved a chance to live through life's stages. We provide a critical analysis of these three rationales, noting the differences between them, and then questioning the ethical and legal justifications for such age choosing.

摘要

当 2020 年春季新冠疫情蔓延至美国时,许多州和医院宣布了使用年龄作为分类排除标准的危机护理标准计划。这种按年龄选择的做法很快就被标记为歧视性的,因此一些州和医院开始在其计划中更深入地嵌入年龄作为决胜标准。使用年龄作为决胜标准的理由有不同:年轻患者比老年患者更有可能存活,拯救年轻患者将拯救更多的生命年,并且年轻患者应该有机会度过生命的各个阶段。我们对这三个理由进行了批判性分析,注意到它们之间的差异,然后质疑这种按年龄选择的伦理和法律依据。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验