Age rationing and prudential lifespan account in Norman Daniels’ Just health
2009

Age Rationing in Healthcare: A Fair Approach?

publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Brauer S

Primary Institution: University of Zurich

Hypothesis

Could age be a valid criterion for rationing healthcare resources?

Conclusion

The study suggests that age rationing can be a morally permissible strategy for addressing healthcare resource scarcity under certain conditions.

Supporting Evidence

  • Daniels argues that age rationing can be justified if it leads to better overall outcomes for society.
  • The study highlights the importance of fairness in healthcare distribution across different age groups.
  • Daniels' approach avoids ageism by framing healthcare allocation as a personal decision over a lifespan.

Takeaway

This study looks at whether it's fair to use age as a reason to decide who gets healthcare. It finds that sometimes, it might be okay to do so.

Methodology

The paper analyzes Norman Daniels' arguments regarding age rationing and its implications for healthcare justice.

Potential Biases

Potential biases may arise from the philosophical assumptions underlying the prudential lifespan account.

Limitations

The study does not address specific empirical data or case studies to support the theoretical framework.

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication