Hastings Center Report 42 (1):27-34 (2012)

The rule of rescue describes the moral impulse to save identifiable lives in immediate danger at any expense. Think of the extremes taken to rescue a small child who has fallen down a well, a woman pinned beneath the rubble of an earthquake, or a submarine crew trapped on the ocean floor. No effort is deemed too great. Yet should this same moral instinct to rescue, regardless of cost, be applied in the emergency room, the hospital, or the community clinic? In health care, the desire to save lives at any cost must be reconciled with the reality of resource scarcity. As one example, the estimated cost for prophylactic Factor VIII to treat one patient with hemophilia for one year is $300,000. Costs of this magnitude have been accepted by public and private insurers in the developed world, even though, in principle, these sums could provide greater overall health benefit if allocated to pay for the unmet health care needs of many other patients. Looking forward, however, broad application of the rule of rescue will be increasingly untenable. But the moral instinct will remain: the desire to help those weakest among us, especially when their small numbers allow us to see them as unique individuals. What, then, is the ethical framework that can guide coverage and reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs into the future?
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1002/hast.12
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 60,878
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

Equality and Priority.Derek Parfit - 1997 - Ratio 10 (3):202–221.
Bentham in a Box: Technology Assessment and Health Care Allocation.Albert R. Jonsen - 1986 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 14 (3-4):172-174.
3. Bentham in a Box: Technology Assessment and Health Care Allocation.Albert R. Jonsen - 1986 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 14 (3-4):172-174.

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Rescuing the Duty to Rescue.Tina Rulli & Joseph Millum - 2014 - Journal of Medical Ethics:1-5.
What Is the Value of Three-Parent IVF?Tina Rulli - 2016 - Hastings Center Report 46 (4):38-47.
Rescuing the Duty to Rescue.Tina Rulli & Joseph Millum - 2016 - Journal of Medical Ethics 42 (4):260-264.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Neurotrauma and the Rule of Rescue.S. Honeybul, G. R. Gillett, K. M. Ho & C. R. P. Lind - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (12):707-710.
The Problem with Rescue Medicine.N. S. Jecker - 2013 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38 (1):64-81.
Ethical and Social Aspects on Rare Diseases.Dusanka Krajnovic - 2012 - Filozofija I Društvo 23 (4):32-48.
An Integrated Approach to Resource Allocation.Louise M. Terry - 2004 - Health Care Analysis 12 (2):171-180.


Added to PP index

Total views
31 ( #344,054 of 2,439,014 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #434,623 of 2,439,014 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes