Cargando…

Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right and an expensive death? Exploring societal perspectives

BACKGROUND: Many publicly-funded health systems apply cost-benefit frameworks in response to the moral dilemma of how best to allocate scarce healthcare resources. However, implementation of recommendations based on costs and benefit calculations and subsequent challenges have led to ‘special cases’...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McHugh, Neil, Baker, Rachel M, Mason, Helen, Williamson, Laura, van Exel, Job, Deogaonkar, Rohan, Collins, Marissa, Donaldson, Cam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4357067/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25885447
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-015-0008-x
_version_ 1782361085704142848
author McHugh, Neil
Baker, Rachel M
Mason, Helen
Williamson, Laura
van Exel, Job
Deogaonkar, Rohan
Collins, Marissa
Donaldson, Cam
author_facet McHugh, Neil
Baker, Rachel M
Mason, Helen
Williamson, Laura
van Exel, Job
Deogaonkar, Rohan
Collins, Marissa
Donaldson, Cam
author_sort McHugh, Neil
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Many publicly-funded health systems apply cost-benefit frameworks in response to the moral dilemma of how best to allocate scarce healthcare resources. However, implementation of recommendations based on costs and benefit calculations and subsequent challenges have led to ‘special cases’ with certain types of health benefits considered more valuable than others. Recent debate and research has focused on the relative value of life extensions for people with terminal illnesses. This research investigates societal perspectives in relation to this issue, in the UK. METHODS: Q methodology was used to elicit societal perspectives from a purposively selected sample of data-rich respondents. Participants ranked 49 statements of opinion (developed for this study), onto a grid, according to level of agreement. These ‘Q sorts’ were followed by brief interviews. Factor analysis was used to identify shared points of view (patterns of similarity between individuals’ Q sorts). RESULTS: Analysis produced a three factor solution. These rich, shared accounts can be broadly summarised as: i) ‘A population perspective – value for money, no special cases’, ii) ‘Life is precious – valuing life-extension and patient choice’, iii) ‘Valuing wider benefits and opportunity cost - the quality of life and death’. From the factor descriptions it is clear that the main philosophical positions that have long dominated debates on the just allocation of resources have a basis in public opinion. CONCLUSIONS: The existence of certain moral positions in the views of society does not ethically imply, and pragmatically cannot mean, that all are translated into policy. Our findings highlight normative tensions and the importance of critically engaging with these normative issues (in addition to the current focus on a procedural justice approach to health policy). Future research should focus on i) the extent to which these perspectives are supported in society, ii) how respondents' perspectives relate to specific resource allocation questions, and iii) the characteristics of respondents associated with each perspective.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4357067
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43570672015-03-13 Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right and an expensive death? Exploring societal perspectives McHugh, Neil Baker, Rachel M Mason, Helen Williamson, Laura van Exel, Job Deogaonkar, Rohan Collins, Marissa Donaldson, Cam BMC Med Ethics Research Article BACKGROUND: Many publicly-funded health systems apply cost-benefit frameworks in response to the moral dilemma of how best to allocate scarce healthcare resources. However, implementation of recommendations based on costs and benefit calculations and subsequent challenges have led to ‘special cases’ with certain types of health benefits considered more valuable than others. Recent debate and research has focused on the relative value of life extensions for people with terminal illnesses. This research investigates societal perspectives in relation to this issue, in the UK. METHODS: Q methodology was used to elicit societal perspectives from a purposively selected sample of data-rich respondents. Participants ranked 49 statements of opinion (developed for this study), onto a grid, according to level of agreement. These ‘Q sorts’ were followed by brief interviews. Factor analysis was used to identify shared points of view (patterns of similarity between individuals’ Q sorts). RESULTS: Analysis produced a three factor solution. These rich, shared accounts can be broadly summarised as: i) ‘A population perspective – value for money, no special cases’, ii) ‘Life is precious – valuing life-extension and patient choice’, iii) ‘Valuing wider benefits and opportunity cost - the quality of life and death’. From the factor descriptions it is clear that the main philosophical positions that have long dominated debates on the just allocation of resources have a basis in public opinion. CONCLUSIONS: The existence of certain moral positions in the views of society does not ethically imply, and pragmatically cannot mean, that all are translated into policy. Our findings highlight normative tensions and the importance of critically engaging with these normative issues (in addition to the current focus on a procedural justice approach to health policy). Future research should focus on i) the extent to which these perspectives are supported in society, ii) how respondents' perspectives relate to specific resource allocation questions, and iii) the characteristics of respondents associated with each perspective. BioMed Central 2015-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4357067/ /pubmed/25885447 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-015-0008-x Text en © McHugh et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
McHugh, Neil
Baker, Rachel M
Mason, Helen
Williamson, Laura
van Exel, Job
Deogaonkar, Rohan
Collins, Marissa
Donaldson, Cam
Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right and an expensive death? Exploring societal perspectives
title Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right and an expensive death? Exploring societal perspectives
title_full Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right and an expensive death? Exploring societal perspectives
title_fullStr Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right and an expensive death? Exploring societal perspectives
title_full_unstemmed Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right and an expensive death? Exploring societal perspectives
title_short Extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right and an expensive death? Exploring societal perspectives
title_sort extending life for people with a terminal illness: a moral right and an expensive death? exploring societal perspectives
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4357067/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25885447
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-015-0008-x
work_keys_str_mv AT mchughneil extendinglifeforpeoplewithaterminalillnessamoralrightandanexpensivedeathexploringsocietalperspectives
AT bakerrachelm extendinglifeforpeoplewithaterminalillnessamoralrightandanexpensivedeathexploringsocietalperspectives
AT masonhelen extendinglifeforpeoplewithaterminalillnessamoralrightandanexpensivedeathexploringsocietalperspectives
AT williamsonlaura extendinglifeforpeoplewithaterminalillnessamoralrightandanexpensivedeathexploringsocietalperspectives
AT vanexeljob extendinglifeforpeoplewithaterminalillnessamoralrightandanexpensivedeathexploringsocietalperspectives
AT deogaonkarrohan extendinglifeforpeoplewithaterminalillnessamoralrightandanexpensivedeathexploringsocietalperspectives
AT collinsmarissa extendinglifeforpeoplewithaterminalillnessamoralrightandanexpensivedeathexploringsocietalperspectives
AT donaldsoncam extendinglifeforpeoplewithaterminalillnessamoralrightandanexpensivedeathexploringsocietalperspectives