| author |
Jay Sardini
|
| title |
In Defense of an Alternative Approach to Ethical Allocation Decision Making
During a Period of Public Health Emergency:
An Egalitarian Multi-Principle Allocation Decision Making Framework
|
| abstract |
The objective of this paper is to demonstrate that the current utilitarian framework employed by
physicians and other healthcare professionals for making allocation decisions concerning scarce medical
resources during a public health emergency is ethically flawed and must be reconsidered in order to
assure equal and fair opportunity for all individuals to gain access to life-saving healthcare resources.
This paper presents and promotes an alternative ethically defensible framework for the allocation of
scarce medical resources during a public health emergency that is grounded in egalitarian theory assuring
equal and fair opportunity for all patients to receive life-saving interventions. The proposed multi-
principle framework strives to achieve the overarching goal of public health during a pandemic crisis
which is to do the most good for the most people in a way that rejects the inconsistencies and arbitrary
nature of the utilitarian allocation model. The proposed allocation framework accomplishes this objective
by incorporating and balancing the principles of "saving the most lives" and "saving the most years of
life" and ensuring that all individuals have equal opportunity to live through all the cycles of life which is
referred to as the "life cycle" principle. The proposed alternative allocation strategy more effectively
addresses and mitigates the full-range of moral considerations and dilemmas inherent in the difficult work
of allocating scarce medical resources during a public health emergency than does the contemporary
utilitarian framework.
|
| school |
The Caspersen School of Graduate Studies, Drew University
|
| degree |
M.M.H. (2021)
|
| advisor |
Gaetana Kopchinsky
|
| full text | JSardini.pdf - requires Drew uLogin |
