Hostname: page-component-5cf477f64f-zrtmk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-29T07:57:12.702Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Priority-Setting on the Path to Universal Health Care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2023

Leah Z. Rand
Leah Z. Rand*
Affiliation:
PORTAL, HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL, BOSTON, MA, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Keywords

Priority-SettingSocioeconomic RightsHealthcare Resource AllocationProcedural JusticeHealth Technology Assessment
Type
Independent Articles: Commentary
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 51 , Issue 1: The Evolving Fight Against Gun Violence , Spring 2023 , pp. 150 - 152
Copyright
© 2023 The Author(s)

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

DiStefano, M. J., Karim, S. Abdool, Kubiner, C.B., and Hofman, K. J., “Integrating Health Technology Assessment and the Right to Health in South Africa: A Qualitative Content Analysis of Substantive Values in Landmark Judicial Decisions,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 51, no. 1 (2023): 131–149.Google Scholar
Rawls, J., Political Liberalism, expanded ed. (New York: Columbia University Press, 2005).Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Rumbold, B., Weale, A., Rid, A., Wilson, J., and Littlejohns, P., “Public Reasoning and Health-Care Priority Setting: The Case of NICE,” Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 27, no. 1 (2017): 107–134, doi.org/10.1353/ken.2017.0005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DiStefano, et al., supra note 1; SAVE-UHC Working Group. South African Values & Ethics for Universal Health Coverage: An Ethics Framework for Health Priority-Setting, available at < https://save-uhc.org/the-framework/domains> (last visited December 27, 2022).+(last+visited+December+27,+2022).>Google Scholar
McCoy, M. S., Warsh, J., Rand, L., Parker, M., and Sheehan, M., “Patient and Public Involvement: Two Sides of the Same Coin or Different Coins Altogether?” Bioethics 33, no. 6 (2017): 708–715, doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newdick, C., “Can Judges Ration with Compassion? A Priority-Setting Rights Matrix,” Health and Human Rights Journal 20, no. 1 (2018): 107–120.Google ScholarPubMed
Syrett, K., “Courts, Expertise and Resource Allocation: Is there a Judicial ‘Legitimacy Problem’?” Public Health Ethics 7, no. 2 (2013): 112–122, doi.org/10.1093/phe/pht040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiagraj Soobramoney v Minister of Health (Kawzulu-Natal). 1997. Constitutional Court of South Africa.Google Scholar
Syrett, supra note 8.Google Scholar
Mahajan, M., “The Right to Health as the Right to Treatment: Shifting Conceptions of Public Health,” Social Research: An International Quarterly 79 (2012): 819–836, doi.org/10.1353/sor.2012.0005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minister of Health v Treatment Action Campaign (TAC) (2002) 5 SA 721 (CC). 2002. Constitutional Court of South Africa.Google Scholar
Newdick, supra note 7.Google Scholar
Daniels, N., “Justice, Health, and Healthcare,” American Journal of Bioethics 1, no. 2 (2001): 2–16, doi.org/10.1162/152651601300168834.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Syrett, supra note 8.Google Scholar
Thiagraj Soobramoney v Minister of Health, supra note 9.Google Scholar