Journal of Public Health

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 117–126 | Cite as

“Not the years in themselves count”: the role of age for European citizens’ moral attitudes towards resource allocation in modern biomedicine

Original Article

Abstract

Aim

Against the backdrop of controversial bioethical and public health debates on the role of age in decisions on healthcare allocation, we examine the perspectives of European lay persons on ethical implications of age and aging for medicine and health care.

Subject and methods

The study uses a qualitative approach based on the content analysis of 29 focus group discussions (235 participants) held in 4 European countries (Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden) between 2005 and 2012.

Results

While lay persons unanimously reject chronological age as a criterion for resource allocation, they acknowledge that age can be an important factor in ethical decision-making processes in many different ways. In the discussions, they articulate biographical concepts and viewpoints (such as age roles, ideas of the course and prime of life, responsibilities between generations), framing questions of resource allocation with regard to a teleological perspective of a good life.

Conclusion

Participants introduce a biographical outlook on medical decision making while at the same time articulating different conceptions of aging and the life course. Public health ethics needs to find ways to incorporate this plurality of temporal perspectives on the good life.

Keywords

Age Resource allocation Ethics Qualitative research Lay moralities 

References

  1. Agich GJ (2001) Implications of aging paradigms for bioethics. In: Weisstub D, Thomasma D, Gauthier S, Tomossy GF (eds) Aging: culture, health and social change. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 15–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asch SM, Kerr EA, Keesey J, Adams JL, Setodji CM, Malik S, McGlynn EA (2006) Who is at greatest risk for receiving poor-quality health care? N Engl J Med 354:1147–1156. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa044464 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergmark A, Parker MG, Thorslund M (2000) Priorities in care and services for elderly people: a path without guidelines? J Med Ethics 26:312–318. doi:10.1136/jme.26.5.312 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Binstock RH, Post SG, Mills LS (1991) Too old for health care?: controversies in medicine, law, economics, and ethics. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MDGoogle Scholar
  5. Bloor M, Frankland J, Thomas M, Robson K (2001) Focus groups in social research. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Breyer F, Schultheiss C (2002) “Primary” rationing of health services in ageing societies: a normative analysis’. Int J Health Care Finance 2:247–264. doi:10.1023/A:1022330000200 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brockmann H (2002) Why is less money spent on health care for the elderly than for the rest of the population? Health care rationing in German hospitals. Soc Sci Med 55:593–608. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00190-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Callahan D (1987) Setting limits: medical goals in an aging society. Schuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Callahan D, ter Meulen RHJ, Topinková E (1995) A world growing old: the coming health care challenges. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Daniels N (1988) Am I my parents’ keeper? An essay on justice between the young and the old. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Dey I, Fraser N (2000) Age-based rationing in the allocation of health care. J Aging Health 12:511–537. doi:10.1177/089826430001200404 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Ebrahim S (2000) Do not resuscitate decisions: flogging dead horses or a dignified death? Resuscitation should not be withheld from elderly people without discussion. BMJ 320:1155–1156. doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7243.1155 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Emanuel E (1991) The ends of human life: medical ethics in a liberal polity. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Friese S (2011) Qualitative data analysis with Atlas.ti. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Giordano S (2005) Respect for equality and the treatment of the elderly: declarations of human rights and age-based rationing. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 14:83–92. doi:10.1017/S0963180105050097 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Harris J (1985) The value of life. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Heckhausen J, Lang FR (1996) Social construction and old age: normative conceptions and interpersonal processes. In: Semin GR, Fiedler K (eds) Applied social psychology. Sage, London, pp 374–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kapp MB (2002) Health care rationing affecting older persons: rejected in principle but implemented in fact. J Aging Soc Policy 14:27–42. doi:10.1300/J031v14n02_02 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Levkoff S, Wetle T (1989) Clinical decision making in the care of the aged. J Aging Health 1:83–101Google Scholar
  20. Mayring P (2004) Qualitative content analysis. In: Flick U, von Kardoff E, Steinke I (eds) A companion to qualitative research. Sega, Berlin, pp 266–269Google Scholar
  21. Mertz M, Inthorn J, Renz G, Rothenberger LG, Salloch S, Schildmann J, Wöhlke S, Schicktanz S (2014) Research across the disciplines: a road map for quality criteria in empirical ethics research. BMC Med Ethics 15:17. doi:10.1186/1472-6939-15-17 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Molewijk B, Stiggelbout AM, Otten W, Dupuis HM, Kievit J (2004) Empirical data and moral theory: a plea for integrated empirical ethics. Med Health Care Philos 7:55–69. doi:10.1023/B:MHEP.0000021848.75590.b0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Moody HR (1994) Four scenarios for an aging society. Hast Cent Rep 24:32–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Morgan DL, Scannell AU (1997) Planning focus groups. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. National Health Service (NHS) (2014) NICE drugs for the elderly is unchanged. http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/02February/Pages/NICE-drugs-policy-for-the-elderly-is-unchanged.aspx. Accessed 14 March 2014
  26. Persad G, Wertheimer A, Emanuel EJ (2009) Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions. Lancet 373:423–431. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60137-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Rivlin MM (1995) Protecting elderly people: flaws in ageist arguments. BMJ 310:1179–1182. doi:10.1136/bmj.310.6988.1179 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Ryan M, Gerard K, Amaya-Amaya M (eds) (2008) Using discrete choice experiments to value health and health care. Springer, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  29. Schermer M, Pinxten W (2013) Ethics, health policy and (anti-) aging: mixed blessings. Springer, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schweda M (2013) Zu alt für die Hüftprothese, zu jung zum Sterben? Die Rolle von Altersbildern in der ethisch-politischen Debatte um eine altersabhängige Begrenzung medizinischer Leistungen. In: Duttge G, Zimmermann-Acklin M (eds) Gerecht sorgen. Verständigungsprozesse über den Einsatz knapper Ressourcen bei Patienten am Lebensende. Universitätsverlag Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany, pp 149–168Google Scholar
  31. Schweda M, Marckmann G (2013) How do we want to grow old? Anti-aging medicine and the scope of public healthcare in liberal democracies. Bioethics 27:357–364. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2012.01960.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Stallard JM, Decker IM, Sellers JB (2002) Health care for the elderly: a social obligation. Nurs Forum 37:5–15. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6198.2002.tb01192.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. ter Meulen RHJ (1995) Solidarity with the elderly and the allocation of resources. In: Callahan D, ter Meulen RHJ, Topinková E (eds) A world growing old: the coming health care challenges. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC, pp 73–84Google Scholar
  34. Terri R, Fried MD, Bradley EH, Towle VE, Allore H (2002) Understanding the treatment preferences of seriously ill patients. N Engl J Med 346:1061–1066. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa012528 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Torres-Gil FM (1991) The new aging: politics and change in America. Auburn, Westport, CTGoogle Scholar
  36. Ubachs-Moust J, Houtepen R, Vos R, ter Meulen R (2008) Value judgements in the decision making-process for the elderly patient. J Med Ethics 34:863–868. doi:10.1136/jme.2008.025247 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Willey J (2014) NHS ban medicine if you are ‘too old’ in new attack on Britain’s elderly. Daily Express. http://www.express.co.uk/news/health/460371/NHS-ban-medicine-if-you-are-too-old-in-new-attack-on-Britain-s-elderly. Accessed 17 March 2014

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Medical Ethics and History of MedicineUniversity Medical Center GöttingenGöttingenGermany

Personalised recommendations