Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Role for Stakeholder Ethics in Meeting the Ethical Challenges Posed by Managed-Care Organizations

  • Published:
HEC Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

REFERENCES

  1. Stone A. Meetings of the American Psychiatric Association, San Diego, CA; 1997.

  2. Mariner W. Business vs. Medical Ethics: Conflicting standards for managed care. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics. 1995; 230:236–46.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Martin JA, Bjerknes LK. The Legal and Ethical Implications of Gag Clauses in Physician Contracts. American Journal of Law & Medicine. 1996; 22:433–76.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Morriem EH. Balancing Act: The New Medical Ethics of Medicines New Economics. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Peery NS. Jr. Business, Government and Society. Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Moore SF. Law as Process: An anthropological approach. London, UK/Boston, MA: Routledge and K. Paul; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Rodwin M. Medicine Money & Morals: Physicians' conflicts of interest. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Moore v. Regent of the University of California, 51 Cal. 3d 120-24 (1990).

  9. Wickline v. State of California, 192 Cal. App 3d 1630 (1986).

  10. American Medical Association. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. Code of Medical Ethics: Current opinions with annotations. Chicago, IL: Southern Illinois University Schools of Medicine and Law; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hillman A. Financial Incentives for Physicians in HMOs. New England Journal of Medicine. 1987; 317:1743–48.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hillman A, Pauly MV, Kerstein JJ. How do Financial Incentives Affect Physicians' Clinical Decisions and the Financial Performance of Health Maintenance Organizations? New England Journal of Medicine. 1989; 319:86–92.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Scott RA, Aiken LH, Mechanic D, Moracsik J. Organizational Aspects of Caring. The Milbank Quarterly. 1995; 73(1):77–95.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Martin, J.A. Martin, Bjerknes, L.K., Hall M.A. Informed Consent to Rationing Decisions. The Milbank Quarterly. 1993; 71(4):645–67.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Corbin AL. Corbin on Contracts. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.; 1952.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Black's Law Dictionary.

  17. Mariner D, Leitner E, Managed Care Liability. Chicago, IL: American Bar Association; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Furrow BR, Greaney TL, Johnson SH, Jost TS, Schwartz RL. Health Law: Cases, materials and problems. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Friedman M. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits. In Beauchamp TL, Bowie NE (eds.). Ethical Theory and Business. 5th ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Clark R. Agency Costs versus Fiduciary Duties. In Pratt W, Zeckhauser RJ (eds.). Principals and Agents: The structure of business. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nelson H. Nonprofit and For-Profit HMOs: Converging practices but different goals? New York, NY: Milbank Memorial Fund; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dodge v. Ford Motor Co., Supreme Court of Michigan, 204 Mich. 459, 170 N.W. 668 (1919).

  23. Health Care in America: Your Money or Your Life. The Economist. (7 March); 1998:23–26.

  24. Freeman RE. A Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation. In Beauchamp TL, Bowie NE (eds.). Ethical Theory and Business, 5th ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Goodpastor KE. Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis. In Beauchamp TL, Bowie NE (eds.). Ethical Theory and Business, 5th ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Boatright JR. Fiduciary Duties and the Shareholder-Management Relation: Or, what's so special about shareholders? In Beauchamp TL, Bowie NE (eds.). Ethical Theory and Business, 5th ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Orts EW. Beyond Shareholders: Interpreting corporate constituency statutes. George Washington Law Review. 1992; 61(1):14–135.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Romano R. What Is the Value of Other Constituency Statutes to Shareholders? [Comment]. University of Toronto Law Journal. 1993; XLIII(3):533–42.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Millstein IM. The Responsible Board. The Business Lawyer. 1998; 52:407.

    Google Scholar 

  30. N.Y. Bus. Corp. Law §717(b) (McKinney Supp. 1991).

  31. Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. §§33-313(e) (West Supp. 1992).

  32. Revised Model Business Code §8.30(a)(1992).

  33. Revised Model Business Code §4.01(c).

  34. Hart O. An Economist's View of Fiduciary Duty. University of Toronto Law Journal. 1993; XLIII(3):299–315.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Daniels R. Stakeholders and Takeovers: Can contractarianism be compassionate? University of Toronto Law Journal. 1993; XLIII(3):331.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Patricia Illingworth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Illingworth, P. A Role for Stakeholder Ethics in Meeting the Ethical Challenges Posed by Managed-Care Organizations. HEC Forum 11, 306–322 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008991515231

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008991515231

Keywords

Search

Navigation