Cargando…
If You’re a Rawlsian, How Come You’re So Close to Utilitarianism and Intuitionism? A Critique of Daniels’s Accountability for Reasonableness
Norman Daniels’s theory of ‘accountability for reasonableness’ is an influential conception of fairness in healthcare resource allocation. Although it is widely thought that this theory provides a consistent extension of John Rawls’s general conception of justice, this paper shows that accountabilit...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5816125/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28332130 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10728-017-0343-9 |
_version_ | 1783300623792340992 |
---|---|
author | Badano, Gabriele |
author_facet | Badano, Gabriele |
author_sort | Badano, Gabriele |
collection | PubMed |
description | Norman Daniels’s theory of ‘accountability for reasonableness’ is an influential conception of fairness in healthcare resource allocation. Although it is widely thought that this theory provides a consistent extension of John Rawls’s general conception of justice, this paper shows that accountability for reasonableness has important points of contact with both utilitarianism and intuitionism, the main targets of Rawls’s argument. My aim is to demonstrate that its overlap with utilitarianism and intuitionism leaves accountability for reasonableness open to damaging critiques. The important role that utilitarian-like cost-effectiveness calculations are allowed to play in resource allocation processes disregards the separateness of persons and is seriously unfair towards individuals whose interests are sacrificed for the sake of groups. Furthermore, the function played by intuitions in settling frequent value conflicts opens the door for sheer custom and vested interests to steer decision-making. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5816125 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58161252018-02-27 If You’re a Rawlsian, How Come You’re So Close to Utilitarianism and Intuitionism? A Critique of Daniels’s Accountability for Reasonableness Badano, Gabriele Health Care Anal Original Article Norman Daniels’s theory of ‘accountability for reasonableness’ is an influential conception of fairness in healthcare resource allocation. Although it is widely thought that this theory provides a consistent extension of John Rawls’s general conception of justice, this paper shows that accountability for reasonableness has important points of contact with both utilitarianism and intuitionism, the main targets of Rawls’s argument. My aim is to demonstrate that its overlap with utilitarianism and intuitionism leaves accountability for reasonableness open to damaging critiques. The important role that utilitarian-like cost-effectiveness calculations are allowed to play in resource allocation processes disregards the separateness of persons and is seriously unfair towards individuals whose interests are sacrificed for the sake of groups. Furthermore, the function played by intuitions in settling frequent value conflicts opens the door for sheer custom and vested interests to steer decision-making. Springer US 2017-03-22 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5816125/ /pubmed/28332130 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10728-017-0343-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Badano, Gabriele If You’re a Rawlsian, How Come You’re So Close to Utilitarianism and Intuitionism? A Critique of Daniels’s Accountability for Reasonableness |
title | If You’re a Rawlsian, How Come You’re So Close to Utilitarianism and Intuitionism? A Critique of Daniels’s Accountability for Reasonableness |
title_full | If You’re a Rawlsian, How Come You’re So Close to Utilitarianism and Intuitionism? A Critique of Daniels’s Accountability for Reasonableness |
title_fullStr | If You’re a Rawlsian, How Come You’re So Close to Utilitarianism and Intuitionism? A Critique of Daniels’s Accountability for Reasonableness |
title_full_unstemmed | If You’re a Rawlsian, How Come You’re So Close to Utilitarianism and Intuitionism? A Critique of Daniels’s Accountability for Reasonableness |
title_short | If You’re a Rawlsian, How Come You’re So Close to Utilitarianism and Intuitionism? A Critique of Daniels’s Accountability for Reasonableness |
title_sort | if you’re a rawlsian, how come you’re so close to utilitarianism and intuitionism? a critique of daniels’s accountability for reasonableness |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5816125/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28332130 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10728-017-0343-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT badanogabriele ifyourearawlsianhowcomeyouresoclosetoutilitarianismandintuitionismacritiqueofdanielssaccountabilityforreasonableness |