Health systems need to set priorities fairly. In one way or another, part of this important task will fall to physicians. How do they make judgments about resource stewardship, and how should they do so? How can they make such decisions in a manner that is compatible with their clinical duties to patients? In this book, philosophers, bioethicists, physicians, lawyers and health policy experts make the case that priority setting and rationing contribute significantly to the possibility of affordable and fair healthcare and that clinicians play an indispensable role in that process. The book depicts the results of a survey of European physicians about their experiences with rationing and other cost containment strategies, and their perception of scarcity and fairness in their health care systems. Responding to and complementing these findings, commentators discuss why resource allocation and bedside rationing is necessary and justifiable. The book explores how bedside rationing relates to clinical judgments about medical necessity and medical indications, marginal benefits, weak evidence based medicine, off-label use. The book highlights how comparative studies of health care systems can advance more effective and fair bedside rationing through learning from one another. From a practical standpoint, the book offers a number of strategies for health care systems and clinicians to work in tandem to allocate and ration resources as fairly as possible: how to foster more attention to fairness when rationing at the bedside, how to avoid exacerbating health disparities when allocating resources, how to teach about bedside rationing to students, how to discuss rationing more explicitly in the public arena and in the doctor's office.

Interesting and important ethical questions confront researchers, regulators, institutional review boards, support personnel, and research participants committed to the ethical conduct of human subjects research at all stages of research. Questions encompass - but are not limited to - study design, enrolling participants, balancing the clinical needs of participants against the research agenda, ending trials, discharging post-trial obligations, and resolving conflicts. Straightforward solutions to these types of questions are often not found in regulations, ethics codes, or the bioethics literature. These resources may leave room for interpretation, offer conflicting guidance, or simply fail to address particular questions. Ethics consultation, which has been offered in clinical care settings with regularity since the 1980s, has since the turn of the century increasingly been sought in the clinical research context. Because there has only lately been recognition that ethics consultants can play a valuable role helping the research community conduct research in the most ethically informed way, there are many open questions in the field of research ethics consultation including the appropriate role of consultants and the best methods of consultation. The Clinical Center Bioethics Consultation Service has been serving the NIH community of researchers, administrators, healthcare providers, and research participants for more than a decade, conducting nearly 1,000 consultations in that time. In this book, members of the Bioethics Consultation Service reflect on this long track-record and unparalleled range of research ethics consultations to share a collection of their most interesting and informative research ethics consultations and to start a dialogue on remaining open questions. Although the NIH experience is unique, this book focuses on cases - and associated lessons - that are generalizable and valuable for the entire clinical research community. This book will be valuable to ethics consultants, clinical investigators, students and teachers, and others desiring insight into clinical research ethics and ethics consultation.

This book takes the conversation between bioethics and health policy to a new level. Moving beyond principles and normative frameworks, bioethicists writing in the volume consider the actual policy problems faced by health care systems, while policy-makers reflect on the moral values inherent in both the process and content of health policy. The result is a vigorous dialogue with some of the nation's leading experts at the interface of ethics and health policy. the book provides a history of the values implicit in U.S. health policy, a discussion of the federal and state roles in policy making, an ethical examination of the social goals expressed through various policies, an analysis of the role of public opinion in the creation of health policy, and an exploration of the value of the private sector in health policy. In addition, the authors examine some of the major ethical controversies in health policy, such as the challenge of balancing ethical concerns with economic realities, the need to allocate scarce health resources, the call for heightened accountability, and the impact of various policies on vulnerable populations. The book concludes with an examination of the ethical issues in health services research, including the threats to privacy that arise in such research. To a greater extent than any previous volume, it establishes a strong connection between the disciplines of medical ethics and health policy.

Health systems need to set priorities fairly. In one way or another, part of this important task will fall to physicians. How do they make judgments about resource stewardship, and how should they do so? How can they make such decisions in a manner that is compatible with their clinical duties to patients? In this book, philosophers, bioethicists, physicians, lawyers and health policy experts make the case that priority setting and rationing contribute significantly to the possibility of affordable and fair healthcare and that clinicians play an indispensable role in that process. The book depicts the results of a survey of European physicians about their experiences with rationing and other cost containment strategies, and their perception of scarcity and fairness in their health care systems. Responding to and complementing these findings, commentators discuss why resource allocation and bedside rationing is necessary and justifiable. The book explores how bedside rationing relates to clinical judgments about medical necessity and medical indications, marginal benefits, weak evidence based medicine, off-label use. The book highlights how comparative studies of health care systems can advance more effective and fair bedside rationing through learning from one another. From a practical standpoint, the book offers a number of strategies for health care systems and clinicians to work in tandem to allocate and ration resources as fairly as possible: how to foster more attention to fairness when rationing at the bedside, how to avoid exacerbating health disparities when allocating resources, how to teach about bedside rationing to students, how to discuss rationing more explicitly in the public arena and in the doctor's office.