Priority setting in health care: on the relation between reasonable choices on the micro-level and the macro-level
There has been much discussion about how to obtain legitimacy at macro-level priority setting in health care by use of fair procedures, but how should we consider priority setting by individual clinicians or health workers at the micro-level? Despite the fact that just health care totally hinges upon their decisions, surprisingly little attention seems being paid to the legitimacy of these decisions. This paper addresses the following question: what are the conditions that have to be met in order to ensure that individual claims on health care are well aligned with an overall concept of just health care? Drawing upon a distinction between individual and aggregated needs, I argue that even though we assume the legitimacy of macro-level guidelines, this legitimacy is not directly transferable to decisions at micro-level simply by adherence to the guidelines’ recommendation. Further, I argue that individual claims are subject to the formal principle of equality and the demands of vertical and horizontal equity in a way that gives context- and patient-related equity concerns precedence over equity concerns captured at the macro-level. I conclude that if we aim to achieve just health care, we need to develop a complementary framework for legitimising individual judgment of patients’ claims on health care resources. Moreover, I suggest the basic structure of such a framework.
KeywordsClinical guidelines Collective deliberation Equality Framework Health care need Horizontal equity Judgment Priority setting Reasonableness Vertical equity
- 3.Helsetilsynet: Retningslinjer for retningslinjer. Prosess og metode for utvikling og implementering av faglige retningslinjer. 2002. Statens Helsetilsyn, Norway.Google Scholar
- 4.Rawls, John. 1993. Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
- 6.Daniels, Norman, and James E. Sabin. 2002. Setting limits fairly: Can we learn to share medical resources? Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 9.Sackett, David L., et al. 1996. Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312: 71–72.Google Scholar
- 13.Daniels, Norman. 1996. Justice and justification: Reflective equilibrium in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- 14.Norheim, Ole Frithjof. 1999. Healthcare rationing—are additional criteria needed for assessing evidence based clinical practice guidelines? BMJ 319: 1426–1429.Google Scholar
- 15.Norheim, Ole Frithjof. 2003. Norway. In International study on priority setting and accountability for reasonableness, ed. Chris Ham and Glenn Robert, 99–114. Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- 16.Aristotle. 1984. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics (trans. Hippocrates G. Apostle.). Grinnell, Iowa: The Peripatetic Press.Google Scholar
- 17.Gosepath, Stefan. 2005. Equality. March 22, 2007: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2005/entries/equality/.