12 found
Order:
  1. Saving People From the Harm of Death.Espen Gamlund & Carl Tollef Solberg (eds.) - 2019 - New York: Oxford University Press.
    Death is something we mourn or fear as the worst thing that could happen―whether the deaths of close ones, the deaths of strangers in reported accidents or tragedies, or our own. And yet, being dead is something that no one can experience and live to describe. This simple truth raises a host of difficult philosophical questions about the negativity surrounding our sense of death, and how and for whom exactly it is harmful. The question of whether death is bad has (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  2. Severity as a Priority Setting Criterion: Setting a Challenging Research Agenda.Mathias Barra, Mari Broqvist, Erik Gustavsson, Martin Henriksson, Niklas Juth, Lars Sandman & Carl Tollef Solberg - 2019 - Health Care Analysis 1:1-20.
    Priority setting in health care is ubiquitous and health authorities are increasingly recognising the need for priority setting guidelines to ensure efficient, fair, and equitable resource allocation. While cost-effectiveness concerns seem to dominate many policies, the tension between utilitarian and deontological concerns is salient to many, and various severity criteria appear to fill this gap. Severity, then, must be subjected to rigorous ethical and philosophical analysis. Here we first give a brief history of the path to today’s severity criteria in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  3.  23
    The Disvalue of Death in the Global Burden of Disease.Carl Tollef Solberg, Ole Frithjof Norheim & Mathias Barra - 2018 - Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (3):192-198.
    In the Global Burden of Disease study, disease burden is measured as disability-adjusted life years. The paramount assumption of the DALY is that it makes sense to aggregate years lived with disability and years of life lost. However, this is not smooth sailing. Whereas morbidity is something that happens to an individual, loss of life itself occurs when that individual’s life has ended. YLLs quantify something that involves no experience and does not take place among living individuals. This casts doubt (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  4.  22
    The Badness of Death and Priorities in Health.Carl Tollef Solberg & Espen Gamlund - 2016 - BMC Medical Ethics 17 (1):1-9.
    BackgroundThe state of the world is one with scarce medical resources where longevity is not equally distributed. Given such facts, setting priorities in health entails making difficult yet unavoidable decisions about which lives to save. The business of saving lives works on the assumption that longevity is valuable and that an early death is worse than a late death. There is a vast literature on health priorities and badness of death, separately. Surprisingly, there has been little cross-fertilisation between the academic (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  5.  3
    Do Not Despair About Severity—Yet.Mathias Barra, Mari Broqvist, Erik Gustavsson, Martin Henriksson, Niklas Juth, Lars Sandman & Carl Tollef Solberg - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (8):557-558.
    In a recent extended essay, philosopher Daniel Hausman goes a long way towards dismissing severity as a morally relevant attribute in the context of priority setting in healthcare. In this response, we argue that although Hausman certainly points to real problems with how severity is often interpreted and operationalised within the priority setting context, the conclusion that severity does not contain plausible ethical content is too hasty. Rather than abandonment, our proposal is to take severity seriously by carefully mapping the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  1
    Severity as a Priority Setting Criterion: Setting a Challenging Research Agenda.Mathias Barra, Mari Broqvist, Erik Gustavsson, Martin Henriksson, Niklas Juth, Lars Sandman & Carl Tollef Solberg - 2020 - Health Care Analysis 28 (1):25-44.
    Priority setting in health care is ubiquitous and health authorities are increasingly recognising the need for priority setting guidelines to ensure efficient, fair, and equitable resource allocation. While cost-effectiveness concerns seem to dominate many policies, the tension between utilitarian and deontological concerns is salient to many, and various severity criteria appear to fill this gap. Severity, then, must be subjected to rigorous ethical and philosophical analysis. Here we first give a brief history of the path to today’s severity criteria in (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  7. Abort Og Fosterreduksjon: En Etisk Sammenligning.Silje Langseth Dahl, Rebekka Hylland Vaksdal, Mathias Barra, Espen Gamlund & Carl Tollef Solberg - 2019 - Etikk I Praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 1:89-111.
    In recent years, multifetal pregnancy reduction (MFPR) has increasingly been the subject of debate in Norway, and the intensity reached a tentative maximum when Legislation Department delivered the interpretative statement § 2 - Interpretation of the Abortion Act in 2016 in response to the Ministry of Health (2014) requesting the Legislation Department to consider whether the Law on abortion allows for MFPR of healthy fetuses in multiple pregnancies. The Legislation Department concluded that current abortion laws allow MFPR within the framework (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  6
    Mandatory Childhood Vaccination: Should Norway Follow?Espen Gamlund, Karl Erik Müller, Kathrine Knarvik Paquet & Carl Tollef Solberg - 2020 - Etikk I Praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 1:7-27.
    _Systematic public vaccination constitutes a tremendous health success, perhaps the greatest achievement of biomedicine so far. There is, however, room for improvement. Each year, 1.5 million deaths could be avoided with enhanced immunisation coverage. In recent years, many countries have introduced mandatory childhood vaccination programmes in an attempt to avoid deaths. In Norway, however, the vaccination programme has remained voluntary. Our childhood immunisation programme covers protection for twelve infectious diseases, and Norwegian children are systematically immunised from six weeks to sixteen (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  2
    Bør vi diskontere fremtidige helsegevinster?Carl Tollef Solberg, Mathias Barra & Bjarne Robberstad - 2020 - Norsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 55 (2-03):170-184.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  4
    Consistency is Not Overrated.Carl Tollef Solberg, Ole Frithjof Norheim & Mathias Barra - 2019 - Journal of Medical Ethics 45 (12):830-831.
    In a recent paper— The disvalue of death in the global burden of disease 1—we question the commensurability of the two components of the disability-adjusted life year — years lived with disability and years of life lost —and offer a tentative solution to this problem. In an exciting and constructive reply— Is consistency overrated? 2—philosopher S Andrew Schroeder argues that our concern about the DALY may be missing the mark by accepting the DALY as what he refers to as an (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  4
    Døden som et onde.Carl Tollef Solberg - 2019 - Norsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 54 (3):167-186.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  3
    The Devils in the DALY: Prevailing Evaluative Assumptions.Carl Tollef Solberg, Preben Sørheim, Karl Erik Müller, Espen Gamlund, Ole Frithjof Norheim & Mathias Barra - 2020 - Public Health Ethics 13 (3):259-274.
    In recent years, it has become commonplace among the Global Burden of Disease study authors to regard the disability-adjusted life year primarily as a descriptive health metric. During the first phase of the GBD, it was widely acknowledged that the DALY had built-in evaluative assumptions. However, from the publication of the 2010 GBD and onwards, two central evaluative practices—time discounting and age-weighting—have been omitted from the DALY model. After this substantial revision, the emerging view now appears to be that the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark