480 research outputs found

    Risk, Everyday Intutions, and the Institutional Value of Tort Law

    Get PDF
    This Note offers a normative critique of cost-benefit analysis, one informed by deontological moral theory, in the context of the debate over whether tort litigation or a non-tort approach is the appropriate response to mass harm. The first Part argues that the difference between lay and expert intuitions about risk and harm often reflects a difference in normative judgments about the existing facts, rather than a difference in belief about what facts exist, which makes the lay intuitions more defensible. The second Part considers how tort has dealt with this divergence between lay and expert perspectives. It also evaluates how tort\u27s approach has differed from that of public law approaches to accident law, such as legislative compensation and risk regulation by administrative agencies. Ultimately, tort\u27s ability to recognize the value of lay intuitions supports retaining the tort perspective as part of our societal arsenal of responses to risk and harm. This ability can also support a pro-tort perspective in two practical debates in the arena of tort law: that over preemption of tort law by administrative agency judgments, and that over access to tort recovery as part of a no-fault system. © 2010 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University

    Risk, Everyday Intuitions, and the Institutional Value of Tort Law

    Get PDF
    This Note offers a normative critique of cost-benefit analysis, one informed by deontological moral theory, in the context of the debate over whether tort litigation or a non-tort approach is the appropriate response to mass harm. The first Part argues that the difference between lay and expert intuitions about risk and harm often reflects a difference in normative judgments about the existing facts, rather than a difference in belief about what facts exist, which makes the lay intuitions more defensible. The second Part considers how tort has dealt with this divergence between lay and expert perspectives. It also evaluates how tort's approach has differed from that of public law approaches to accident law, such as legislative compensation and risk regulation by administrative agencies. Ultimately, tort's ability to recognize the value of lay intuitions supports retaining the tort perspective as part of our societal arsenal of responses to risk and harm. This ability can also support a pro-tort perspective in two practical debates in the arena of tort law: that over preemption of tort law by administrative agency judgments, and that over access to tort recovery as part of a no-fault system

    The ethics of expanding access to cheaper, less effective treatments

    Get PDF
    This article examines a fundamental question of justice in global health. Is it ethically preferable to provide a larger number of people with cheaper treatments that are less effective (or more toxic), or to restrict treatments to a smaller group to provide a more expensive but more effective or less toxic alternative? We argue that choosing to provide less effective or more toxic interventions to a larger number of people is favored by the principles of utility, equality, and priority for those worst-off. Advocates are mistaken to demand that medical care provided in low-income and middle-income countries should be the same as in high-income countries

    Expanding Deliberation in Critical-Care Policy Design

    Get PDF
    Jeffrey Kirby\u27s (2016) insightful contribution suggests that critical-care decisions should be responsive to the interests of multiple stakeholders, and that deliberative engagement can help achieve this goal. I agree. In this commentary, I suggest expanding on Kirby\u27s account of critical care policy development in two ways. Critical-care policy development should expand the scope of deliberation by leaving fewer issues up to expertise or private choice, and it should broaden both the set of costs considered and the set of stakeholders represented in the deliberative process

    Advance Directives and Transformative Experience: Resilience in the Face of Change

    Get PDF
    Walsh valuably deploys L.A. Paul’s “transformative experience” framework (2016) to challenge Ronald Dworkin’s defense of following advance directives prepared in advance of dementia (1994). In this commentary, I critique three aspects of Walsh’s paper: (1) the ambiguity of its initial thesis, (2) its views about the ethics and legality of clinical practice, and (3) its interpretation and application of Dworkin’s and Paul’s views. I also consider what Walsh’s proposal would mean for people facing the prospect of dementia. I conclude that our reasons to honor many advance directives survive the move to a transformative experience framework

    Roles of Education and IQ in Cognitive Reserve in Parkinson's Disease-Mild Cognitive Impairment.

    Get PDF
    Background/aimsThe role of cognitive reserve in Parkinson's disease (PD)-mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is incompletely understood.MethodsThe relationships between PD-MCI, years of education, and estimated premorbid IQ were examined in 119 consecutive non-demented PD patients using logistic regression models.ResultsHigher education and IQ were associated with reduced odds of PD-MCI in univariate analysis. In multivariable analysis, a higher IQ was associated with a significantly decreased odds of PD-MCI, but education was not.ConclusionThe association of higher IQ and decreased odds of PD-MCI supports a role for cognitive reserve in PD, but further studies are needed to clarify the interaction of IQ and education and the impact of other contributors such as employment and hobbies

    Standing by our principles: Meaningful guidance, moral foundations, and multi-principle methodology in medical scarcity

    Get PDF
    Background Several quantitative surveys have been conducted internationally to gather empirical information about physicians’ general attitudes towards health care rationing. Are physicians ready to accept and implement rationing, or are they rather reluctant? Do they prefer implicit bedside rationing that allows the physician–patient relationship broad leeway in individual decisions? Or do physicians prefer strategies that apply explicit criteria and rules? Objectives To analyse the range of survey findings on rationing. To discuss differences in response patterns. To provide recommendations for the enhancement of transparency and systematic conduct in reviewing survey literature. Methods A systematic search was performed for all English and non-English language references using CINAHL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. Three blinded experts independently evaluated title and abstract of each reference. Survey items were extracted that match with: (i) willingness to ration health care or (ii) preferences for different rationing strategies. Results 16 studies were eventually included in the systematic review. Percentages of respondents willing to accept rationing ranged from 94% to 9%. Conclusions The conflicting findings among studies illustrate important ambivalence in physicians that has several implications for health policy. Moreover, this review highlights the importance to interpret survey findings in context of the results of all previous relevant studies

    idic(7)(q11.2)

    Get PDF
    Review on idic(7)(q11.2), with data on clinics, and the genes involved
    corecore