• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Health care as a human right: A Rawlsian approach.
【24h】

Health care as a human right: A Rawlsian approach.

机译：卫生保健是一项人权：罗尔斯式的方法。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This thesis looks at fundamental disagreements about the role of society in the delivery of health care services. In particular, it develops an argument for viewing health care as a human right, and in doing so, argues that society is at least partially responsible for the health of its members. In the first section of the thesis, I argue that health is a human need, and that the institutional goal of health care is to restore to an individual their health. As an institution, health care is a primary social good and, as such, it ought to be afforded the same institutional protections as other primary social goods, and encoded as a "human right.";In the final section, I acknowledge that the objections to health care as a human right should be taken seriously, and that they form the basis of the limits to this right. I argue that any right to health care cannot be extended beyond the restoration of basic, species-typical normal human function. I acknowledge that the Rawlsian ideal has difficulty rendering decisions where priority is a central concern. Finally, I suggest that these limitations can be overcome when the right to health care is viewed as progressively realizable, in conjunction with other basic human rights.;In the second section, I tackle the "Difficult Costs" objection, noting that while there is high financial cost associated with the provision of health care services, the moral and social cost of not providing health care and viewing it as a human right far outweighs the financial costs. With another appeal to Rawlsian principles, by way of reflective equilibrium, I argue that the design of an institution is paramount to the cost-effective distribution of health care resources in accordance with the view that health care is a human right.
机译：本文着眼于关于社会在提供医疗保健服务中的作用的根本分歧。特别是，它提出了将医疗保健视为人权的论据，并据此主张社会至少对其成员的健康负有部分责任。在论文的第一部分中，我认为健康是人类的需要，而医疗保健的体制目标是使个人恢复健康。作为一种机构，医疗保健是一种主要的社会福利，因此，应与其他主要的社会公益产品一样，给予医疗保健同样的机构保护，并被称为“人权”。在最后一部分，我承认应当认真对待对医疗保健作为一项人权的反对意见，这些反对意见构成了限制这一权利的基础。我认为，任何医疗保健权利都不能超出恢复基本的，物种典型的正常人类功能的范围。我承认，在优先考虑是中心问题的情况下，罗尔斯理想很难做出决定。最后，我建议，当人们将医疗保健权与其他基本人权一起逐步实现时，可以克服这些限制。在第二部分中，我解决了“困难成本”异议，并指出与提供医疗保健服务相关的高昂财务成本，不提供医疗保健并将其视为人权的道德和社会成本远远超过财务成本。在通过反射性均衡的方式对罗尔斯原则的另一诉求下，我认为，根据医疗保健是一项人权的观点，机构的设计对于医疗保健资源的成本有效分配至关重要。

著录项

  • 作者

    Thurley, Peter.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Waterloo (Canada).;

  • 授予单位 University of Waterloo (Canada).;
  • 学科 Philosophy.;Health Sciences Health Care Management.
  • 学位 M.A.
  • 年度 2008
  • 页码 78 p.
  • 总页数 78
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号