Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    It would be unfair to allocate a resource to A if B could... — Carmelics
    Home/Bioethics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Preferring non-disabled individual B over disabled individual A is acceptable when treatment to A would be a total waste of a scarce resource

    It would be unfair to allocate a resource to A if B could genuinely benefit from it

    BioethicsJustice & Punishment
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    BioethicsJustice & Punishment

    Connections

    1 topic

    Consequentialism1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Bioethics
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Allocating scarce resources where they produce no benefit is wastefulPreferring non-disabled individual B over disabled individual A is acceptable wh...Treatment effectiveness for A is completely negated by A's condition

    Similar

    Arbitrary distinctions in resource allocation are unfair80%Material resources can be redistributed to compensate for unequal pers...77%If a seriously unfair institution could nevertheless maximize utility,...76%Equality of resources requires compensating for disadvantages that ste...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: disability-care-rationing
    View source passageHide passage
    In all of these scenarios, the CEA and QALY allocation strategy would prima facie favor the non-disabled individual B. Both the priority and the indirect benefits problems are at work here. Although this result seems intuitively acceptable for case (iii), since the treatment to A would be a total waste of a scarce resource, and unfair if B could benefit from it. But it is far less clear what we would say if the effectiveness of the treatment was less obviously compromised by the disability. As f

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective