6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Weighted Lotteries and the Allocation of Scarce Medications for Covid‐19

      research-article
      ,
      The Hastings Center Report
      John Wiley and Sons Inc.
      Covid‐19, vaccines, lotteries, fairness, proceduralism, tiered distribution

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The allocation of vaccines and therapeutics for Covid‐19 obviously raises ethical questions, and physicians and ethicists have begun to address them. Writers have identified various criteria that should guide allocation decisions, but the criteria often conflict and need to be balanced against one another. This article proposes a model for thinking about how different considerations that are relevant to the distribution of vaccines and scarce treatments for Covid‐19 could be integrated into an allocation procedure. The model employs the construct of a weighted lottery, which is a construct that has been employed in other contexts that involve the distribution of scarce resources. The article highlights the advantages of applying a weighted lottery to the Covid‐19 context and offers an illustration for how it might work in practice. The primary aim of the article is to articulate the structural features of a weighted lottery for this context and to bring out its advantages over other methods for allocating Covid‐19 medications .

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          A Framework for Rationing Ventilators and Critical Care Beds During the COVID-19 Pandemic

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Justice and procedure: how does "accountability for reasonableness" result in fair limit-setting decisions?

            A Rid (2008)
            Norman Daniels' theory of justice and health faces a serious practical problem: his theory can ground the special moral importance of health and allows distinguishing just from unjust health inequalities, but it provides little practical guidance for allocating resources when they are especially scarce. Daniels' solution to this problem is a fair process that he specifies as "accountability for reasonableness". Daniels claims that accountability for reasonableness makes limit-setting decisions in healthcare not only legitimate, but also fair. This paper assesses the latter claim. Does accountability for reasonableness result in fair limit-setting decisions? It is argued that the answer to this question is not a clear yes. Daniels is remarkably unclear about the criterion of fairness that accountability for reasonableness satisfies. The paper discusses different options for resolving this lack of clarity and examines how they apply to Daniels' accountability for reasonableness framework. It is concluded, first, that accountability for reasonableness is not a paradigm case of any of the classic notions of procedural justice; second, that what might be called "constrained pure procedural justice" best reflects how accountability for reasonableness results in fair limit-setting decisions; and third, that the procedural conditions of accountability for reasonableness must be further specified and amended to better achieve a fair process, and hence fair limit-setting decisions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              Vaccine Rationing and the Urgency of Social Justice in the Covid‐19 Response

              Abstract The Covid‐19 pandemic needs to be considered from two perspectives simultaneously. First, there are questions about which policies are most effective and fair in the here and now, as the pandemic unfolds. These polices concern, for example, who should receive priority in being tested, how to implement contact tracing, or how to decide who should get ventilators or vaccines when not all can. Second, it is imperative to anticipate the medium‐ and longer‐term consequences that these policies have. The case of vaccine rationing is particularly instructive. Ethical, epidemiological, and economic reasons demand that rationing approaches give priority to groups who have been structurally and historically disadvantaged, even if this means that overall life years gained may be lower.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Hastings Cent Rep
                Hastings Cent Rep
                10.1002/(ISSN)1552-146X
                HAST
                The Hastings Center Report
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0093-0334
                1552-146X
                25 February 2021
                Jan-Feb 2021
                : 51
                : 1 ( doiID: 10.1002/hast.v51.1 )
                : 39-46
                Article
                HAST1218
                10.1002/hast.1218
                8014103
                33630329
                28d017d4-0c23-47ac-9dc4-495add3a665a
                © 2021 The Hastings Center

                This article is being made freely available through PubMed Central as part of the COVID-19 public health emergency response. It can be used for unrestricted research re-use and analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source, for the duration of the public health emergency.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, References: 24, Pages: 8, Words: 6380
                Categories
                Article
                Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                January‐February 2021
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.0.1 mode:remove_FC converted:01.04.2021

                covid‐19,vaccines,lotteries,fairness,proceduralism,tiered distribution

                Comments

                Comment on this article