Literature DB >> 22416740

Why physicians ought to lie for their patients.

Nicolas Tavaglione1, Samia A Hurst.   

Abstract

Sometimes physicians lie to third-party payers in order to grant their patients treatment they would otherwise not receive. This strategy, commonly known as gaming the system, is generally condemned for three reasons. First, it may hurt the patient for the sake of whom gaming was intended. Second, it may hurt other patients. Third, it offends contractual and distributive justice. Hence, gaming is considered to be immoral behavior. This article is an attempt to show that, on the contrary, gaming may sometimes be a physician's duty. Under specific circumstances, gaming may be necessary from the viewpoint of the internal morality of medicine. Moreover, the objections against gaming are examples of what we call the idealistic fallacy, that is, the fallacy of passing judgments in a nonideal world according to ideal standards. Hence, the objections are inconclusive. Gaming is sometimes justified, and may even be required in the name of beneficence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22416740     DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2011.652797

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Bioeth        ISSN: 1526-5161            Impact factor:   11.229


  9 in total

1.  Revealed Opportunism: How Physicians "Game" Prior Authorization Protocols Until They Are Rescinded.

Authors:  Natan R Kahan; Dan-Andrei Waitman; David P Chinitz
Journal:  Am Health Drug Benefits       Date:  2016-09

2.  Why physicians should not lie for their patients.

Authors:  Robert M Sade
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 11.229

3.  Neurofeedback as placebo: a case of unintentional deception?

Authors:  Louiza Kalokairinou; Laura Specker Sullivan; Anna Wexler
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 5.926

4.  Why Not Blow the Whistle on Health Care Insurance Fraud? Evidence from Jiangsu Province, China.

Authors:  Dandan Wang; Changchun Zhan
Journal:  Risk Manag Healthc Policy       Date:  2022-10-12

5.  Patient outcomes vs. service workload: an analysis of outcomes in the burn service of England and Wales.

Authors:  Neophytos Stylianou; Matthew Carr; Evangelos Kontopantelis; Iain Buchan; Ken Dunn
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 2.655

6.  Rationing conscience.

Authors:  Dominic Wilkinson
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 2.903

7.  The good, the bad, and the ugly of medication coverage: Is altering a diagnosis to ensure medication coverage ethical?

Authors:  Gillian Weston; Marti J Rothe; Barry D Kels; Jane M Grant-Kels
Journal:  Int J Womens Dermatol       Date:  2016-04-14

8. 

Authors:  Ahmed Bayoumi; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Outdated criteria for drug plan reimbursement obstruct evidence-based care.

Authors:  Ahmed Bayoumi; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2021-10-11       Impact factor: 8.262

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.