10 likes | 101 Views
Should organ transplants be prioritized based on lifestyle factors? This debate delves into the ethical considerations surrounding the role of health practitioners, undermining the doctor-patient relationship, utilitarianism, universality, justice, beneficence, and non-maleficence. Egalitarianism, deontology, and patient autonomy are also examined. Join the discussion on fair allocation of healthcare resources.
E N D
organ transplants SHOULDnotBE PRIORITISED ACCORDING TO lifestyle factors The health practitioner must play an Inappropriate role of judging others Health care should be available equally to each individual in society • FORAGAINST • Undermining of the doctor-patient relationship: • Patients may lose trust & withhold information • Utilitarianism: can the doctor really do the best for the greater good if the doctor-patient relationship is undermined? Who does the principle of beneficence and non-maleficence apply to? Against: Universality: If we wish to prioritise giving health-care based on whether the patient’s ill-health is self-caused, then all patient whose illness results from diet, employment in stressful/dangerous jobs, participation in dangerous sports etc., should be given lower prioritisation for health care. Given that any life is likely to involve some health-risk, where will we draw the line? Justice: as resources are limited, not everybody can be cured, and therefore priorities must be set. Utilitarianism: in order to do greatest good for greatest number, patient’s unhealthy lifestyle factors must be taken into account. Assumption: lifestyle factors may reduce the likelihood of success A pillar of utilitarianism is impartiality: everybody's happiness is treated equally. For: Egalitarianism: everyone has the moral right of equal access to health care. Deontology: duty to treat all patients Beneficence: act for the good of the patient Non-maleficence: putting someone further down the list causes them harm. - The doctor’s duty is to treat patients, irrespective of the cause of illness. - Judgment by the doctor may result in greater good for a greater number - Patient has a right to make decisions for themselves Demand - Judgment by the doctor may result in greater good for a greater number - Refusing to treat a patient based on past lifestyle choices is doing harm Supply Everyone has a personal right to engage in risky behaviour ? FORAGAINST Beneficence: to whom should we do good? - Patient has the right to make their own choices, even if they are unhealthy - A transplant could do more good in a patient who does not undertake risky behaviour - One should act in such a way that the rule underlying a moral choice is applied equally, to all circumstances Who should receive the organ? Conclusion Group Members Juliette Roex, Emma Lane, Kate Seagrim, Ned Young, Jaya Lindsay