| Literature DB >> 25673363 |
Friedrich Breyer1, Hartmut Kliemt2.
Abstract
Libertarian views on rights tend to rule out coercive redistribution for purposes of public health care guarantees, whereas liberal conceptions support coercive funding of potentially unlimited access to medical services in the name of medical needs. Taking the "priority of liberty" seriously as supreme political value, a plausible prudential argument can avoid these extremes by providing systematic reasons for both delivering and limiting publicly financed guarantees. Given impending demographic change and rapid technical progress in medicine, only a two-tier system with explicitly limited public guarantees and optional privately financed health services seems acceptable.Keywords: priority of liberty; public guarantees; rationing; sustainability
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25673363 DOI: 10.1093/jmp/jhu076
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Philos ISSN: 0360-5310