Abstract
In her article "Rule of Rescue vs. Rescue of statistical lives" [1] Weyma Lübbe elevates gut feelings supporting the "rule of rescue" to "civic judgments". Without doubt in a constitutional democracy ultimately the judgments and aspirations of citizens must be decisive. Yet, particularly in the field of health policy, the bias to overemphasize what are closer rather than more remote, concrete rather than abstract consequences, should be counteracted not supported. The utility forgone by observing the "rule of rescue" in health care must be held against it. Making the "opportunity costs" of applying the rule of rescue visible is part of the citizens' "health ethic information package" and not as such an attack on the "Rule of Rescue".
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
