Does this action prioritise one group over another?.Does this action unfairly contradict someone’s human rights?.Justice is a factor you need to consider when you’re talking about ethics in your interview. A counter-argument would be that early treatment increases survival rates and actually reduces the cost of cancer treatment.It could also be argued that spending public money on radio- and chemotherapy on a smaller group of people is taking budget away from less expensive treatments that would benefit a greater number of people – for example, an increase in statins for those at risk of cardiovascular disease. A counter-argument might be that by referring these patients to specialist oncology centres, you’re actually freeing up other services.It could be argued that prioritising cancer patients means you’re limiting the ability of other patients to access healthcare.This raises a couple of dilemmas for justice, and it’s important you can think of arguments on both sides of the issue. These treatments are expensive and treat a small, but significant proportion of patients. Patients diagnosed with cancer are entitled to a range of treatments including radio- and chemotherapy. Patients suspected of having cancer are prioritised within the NHS, with the maximum waiting time for referral being two weeks (as opposed to 18 weeks for non-urgent referrals). One of the easiest ways to understand justice is with an example.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |