Abstract
AbstractThe Danish healthcare system must meet the need for easy and equal access to healthcare for every citizen. However, investigations have shown unfair prioritization of cancer patients and unfair prioritization of resources for expensive medicines over care. What is needed are principles for proper prioritization. This article investigates whether American ethicists Tom Beauchamp and James Childress’s principle of justice may be helpful as a conceptual framework for reflections on prioritization of expensive biological therapies in the Danish healthcare system. We present an empirical study exploring the principles for prioritizing new expensive biological therapies. This study includes qualitative interviews with key Danish stakeholders experienced in antibody therapy and prioritizing resources for expensive medicines. Beauchamp and Childress’s model only covers government-funded primary and acute healthcare. Based on the interviews, this study indicates that to be helpful in a Danish context this model should include equal access for citizens to government-funded primary and acute healthcare, costly medicine, and other scarce treatments. We conclude that slightly modified, Beauchamp and Childress’s principle of justice might be useful as a conceptual framework for reflections on the prioritization of expensive biological therapies in the Danish healthcare system.
Funder
Aalborg University Library
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Policy,Health (social science)
Reference42 articles.
1. Albertsen, A. 2022. Rare diseases in healthcare priority setting: Should rarity matter? Journal of Medical Ethics 48(9): 624–628.
2. Beauchamp, T. 2019. A defence of universal principles in biomedical ethics. In Biolaw and policy in the twenty-first century, edited by E. Valdés and J. Lecaros, 3–17. International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine. Vol. 78. Cambridge: Springer.
3. Beauchamp, T. and J. Childress. 2019. Principles of biomedical ethics. 8th edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Bladt, T., T. Vorup-Jensen, E. Sædder, and M. Ebbesen. 2020. Empirical investigation of ethical challenges related to the use of biological therapies. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 48(3): 567–578.
5. Danish Council on Ethics (DCE). 2018. (Det Etiske Råd). Just prioritization in the Danish healthcare system. (Retfærdig prioritering i det danske sundhedsvæsen). Copenhagen. https://nationaltcenterforetik.dk/Media/637997316169817241/Udtalelse%20retfaerdig%20prioritering.pdf. Accessed February 2, 2023.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Ethics, Politics, and Minorities;Journal of Bioethical Inquiry;2023-09