Reidar Lie
University of Bergen
It has been suggested that focusing on procedures when setting priorities for health care avoids the conflicts that arise when attempting to agree on principles. A prominent example of this approach is “accountability for reasonableness.” We will argue that the same problem arises with procedural accounts; reasonable people will disagree about central elements in the process. We consider the procedural condition of appeal process and three examples of conflicts over coverage decisions: a patients’ rights law in Norway, health technologies coverage recommendations in the UK, and care withheld by HMOs in the US. In each case a process is at the center of controversy, illustrating the difficulties in establishing procedures that are widely accepted as legitimate. Further work must be done in developing procedural frameworks.
Keywords Health care  Priority setting  Accountability for reasonableness  Appeal process
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11017-008-9062-4
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: 54,431
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

Principles of Biomedical Ethics.Tom L. Beauchamp - 1979 - Oxford University Press.
Justice, Health, and Healthcare.Norman Daniels - 2001 - American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):2 – 16.

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
63 ( #153,449 of 2,371,811 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #160,567 of 2,371,811 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes