Do no harm: A defense of markets in healthcare [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
HEC Forum 22 (3):241-251 (2010)
This paper argues that the rules that constitute a market protect autonomy and increase welfare in healthcare. Markets do the former through protecting rights to self-ownership and a cluster of rights that protect its exercise. Markets protect welfare by organizing and protecting trades. In contrast, prohibition destroys legitimate markets, giving rise to so-called black markets that harm both the autonomy and well-being of agents. For example, a fee-for-service medical system is a highly developed and specialized market. It is individuals working together, through the division of labor, to provide mutual insurance. This coordination, and the benefits it makes possible, is not possible without injunctions against harm. Prohibitions on harm are not mere ethical niceties, they are practice rules for both healthcare and markets. Placing the doctor within a healthcare market actually reinforces the doctor’s moral obligation, and the legal enforcement of that obligation, not to harm. Similarly, markets reinforce patient rights to self-determination through legal and institutional enforcement of the harm principle in the form of the protection of certain basic welfare rights to life, bodily integrity, property, trade, and contract. Since the establishment of markets protects agent autonomy and welfare, and prohibition directly harms the same, there are strong reasons for establishing markets to protect trade in precisely those areas where autonomy and well-being are most vulnerable to exploitation, for example, the trade in human kidneys
|Keywords||Healthcare Markets Black markets Rights Harm Autonomy Fraud Kidneys|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Robert Nozick (1974). Anarchy, State and Utopia. Basic Books.
David P. Gauthier (1986). Morals by Agreement. Oxford University Press.
John Rawls (1955). Two Concepts of Rules. Philosophical Review 64 (1):3-32.
David Hume (1777/2004). An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. Prometheus Books.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Robert E. Frederick & W. Michael Hoffman (1990). The Individual Investor in Securities Markets: An Ethical Analysis. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 9 (7):579 - 589.
Robert S. Taylor (2007). Self-Ownership and Transplantable Human Organs. Public Affairs Quarterly 21 (1):89-107.
Daniel M. Hausman (1989). Are Markets Morally Free Zones? Philosophy and Public Affairs 18 (4):317-333.
Nils Holtug (2002). The Harm Principle. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (4):357-389.
Karl Reinhard Kolmsee (2000). Philosophy at the Core of Economic Markets. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 7 (4):75-78.
James Stacey Taylor (2006). Why Markets in Proto-Deceptive Goods Should Be Restricted. Journal of Business Ethics 65 (4):325 - 335.
Oliver Budzinski & Nadine Lindstädt, New Developments in Media Economics: The Concept of Multisided Markets (Neuere Entwicklungen in der Medienökonomik: Das Konzept der Mehrseitigen Märkte).
Virginia Held (2002). Care and the Extension of Markets. Hypatia 17 (2):19-33.
Debra Satz (2008). The Moral Limits of Markets: The Case of Human Kidneys. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 108 (1pt3):269-288.
Debra Satz (2007). Liberalism, Economic Freedom, and the Limits of Markets. Social Philosophy and Policy 24 (1):120-140.
Robert E. Goodin (2006). Volenti Goes to Market. Journal of Ethics 10 (1-2):53 - 74.
Added to index2010-11-17
Total downloads35 ( #112,332 of 1,793,264 )
Recent downloads (6 months)15 ( #50,445 of 1,793,264 )
How can I increase my downloads?