AJOB Empirical Bioethics 10 (1):63-69 (2019)

Authors
Julian Savulescu
Oxford University
Michael Selgelid
Monash University
Thomas Douglas
Oxford University
1 more
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global public health disaster driven largely by antibiotic use in human health care. Doctors considering whether to prescribe antibiotics face an ethical conflict between upholding individual patient health and advancing public health aims. Existing literature mainly examines whether patients awaiting consultations desire or expect to receive antibiotic prescriptions, but does not report views of the wider public regarding conditions under which doctors should prescribe antibiotics. It also does not explore the ethical significance of public views or their sensitivity to awareness of AMR risks or the standpoint (self-interested or impartial) taken by participants. Methods: An online survey was conducted with a sample of the U.S. public (n = 158). Participants were asked to indicate what relative priority should be given to individual patients and society-at-large from various standpoints and in various contexts, including antibiotic prescription. Results: Of the participants, 50.3% thought that doctors should generally prioritize individual patients over society, whereas 32.0% prioritized society over individual patients. When asked in the context of AMR, 39.2% prioritized individuals whereas 45.5% prioritized society. Participants were significantly less willing to prioritize society over individuals when they themselves were the patient, both in general (p = .001) and in relation to AMR specifically (p = .006). Conclusions: Participants’ attitudes were more oriented to society and sensitive to collective responsibility when informed about the social costs of antibiotic use and when considered from a third-person rather than first-person perspective. That is, as participants came closer to taking the perspective of an informed and impartial “ideal observer,” their support for prioritizing society increased. Our findings suggest that, insofar as antibiotic policies and practices should be informed by attitudes that are impartial and well-informed, there is significant support for prioritizing society.
Keywords drug resistance  antimicrobial resistance  medical overuse
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/23294515.2019.1576799
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

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

Science, Truth, and Democracy.Philip Kitcher - 2001 - Oxford University Press.
Ethical Absolutism and the Ideal Observer.Roderick Firth - 1951 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 12 (3):317-345.
The Epistemology of Moral Disagreement.Richard Rowland - 2017 - Philosophy Compass 12 (2):1-16.
Moral Thinking: Its Levels, Method and Point.David Zimmerman - 1984 - Philosophical Review 93 (2):293.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Ethics and Infectious Disease.Michael J. Selgelid - 2005 - Bioethics 19 (3):272–289.
Notes on the Mathematical Theory of Epidemics.Joannes Reddingius - 1971 - Acta Biotheoretica 20 (3-4):125-157.
Infectious Disease Ontology.Lindsay Grey Cowell & Barry Smith - 2009 - In Infectious Disease Informatics. New York: Springer New York. pp. 373-395.
Focus on Infectious Disease.Michael J. Selgelid - 2005 - Poiesis and Praxis 3 (4):227-228.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-10-16

Total views
230 ( #42,957 of 2,448,435 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
18 ( #38,037 of 2,448,435 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes