Abstract
This paper firstly distinguishes between principles of “global justice” that apply the same anywhere and everywhere – Tännsjö’s utilitarianism, egalitarianism, prioritarianism and such like – and principles of “local justice” that apply within the specific sphere of health-care. Sometimes the latter might just be a special case of the former – but not always. Secondly, it discusses reasons, many psychological in nature, why physicians might devote excessive resources to prolonging life pointlessly, showing once again that those reasons might themselves be morally significant.
Reference25 articles.
1. American College of Physicians’ Ethics, Professionalism and Human Rights Committee
2. (ACP) (2012), “American College of Physicians Ethics Manual: Sixth Edition,” Annals of Internal Medicine 156 (2): 73–104.
3. Biehl J.G. (2005), Vita: Life in a Zone of Social Abandonment, University of California Press, Berkeley.
4. Diener E., Wirtz D., Sishi S. (2001), “End Effects of Rated Life Quality: The James Dean Effect,” Psychological Science 12: 124–128.
5. Elster J. (1990), “Local Justice,” Archives Européenees de Sociologie 31: 117–140.
Cited by
4 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