Abstract
This paper aims to provide an argument for saying that a publicly funded health care system, available to all free at the point of delivery, is morally superior to a market system, and to provide a framework for deciding questions about which forms of health care should be included in such a public system. The argument presents health care as a ‘head’, in the sense of something to which human beings are morally entitled as a necessary condition for a life worthy of human dignity. Alternative arguments for similar conclusions, proposed by Daniels and Buchanan, are critically examined and rejected.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Braybrooke, D.: 1968, Let needs diminish that preferences may prosper, Studies in Moral Philosophy, American Philosophical Quarterly Monography Series No. 1. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, pp. 86–107.
Braybrooke, D.: 1987, Meeting Needs. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1987.
Buchanan, A.E.: 1994, The right to a decent minimum of health care. In: T.L. Beauchamp and L. Walters (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, 4th. edn. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co., pp. 695–700.
Constitution of the World Health Organisation: 1946, Geneva: WHO.
Daniels, N.: 1985, Just Health Care. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Engelhardt, H.T., Jr.: 1986, The Foundations of Bioethics. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mooney, G.: 1992, Economics, Medicine and Health Care, 2nd edn. New York and London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Sheaff, R.: 1996, The Need for Healthcare. London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Matthews, E. Is health care a need?. Med Health Care Philos 1, 155–161 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009999607507
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009999607507