Open AccessThe role of doctors, patients and managers in priority setting decisions: lessons from the `Child B' case
Author(s) -
Ham Chris
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
health expectations
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.314
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1369-7625
pISSN - 1369-6513
DOI - 10.1046/j.1369-6513.1999.00036.x
Subject(s) - rationing , openness to experience , consumerism , theme (computing) , medicine , best interests , girl , service (business) , public relations , nursing , health care , psychology , political science , business , social psychology , law , marketing , developmental psychology , computer science , operating system
The difficulties in treating patients with life threatening illnesses were highlighted by the case of Jaymee Bowen, a 10‐year‐old girl with leukaemia who was refused funding for a second bone marrow transplant in 1995. Jaymee's case was widely reported at the time and came to epitomize the dilemmas of rationing in the United Kingdom's National Health Service. In reality, the paediatricians who had cared for Jaymee based their decision on clinical rather than financial considerations, and the media reporting of the case failed to reflect the complexities of the issues involved. The case also demonstrated the difficulties of determining the best interests of children and of obtaining their consent to treatment. There were disagreements between Jaymee's father and the paediatricians who had treated her about how her best interests could be served and this led to a breakdown of trust and the search for further opinions. This highlighted the rise of consumerism in health care and the challenge to doctors and managers to justify their decisions and to give reasons for these decisions. The common theme in Jaymee's story is the need for greater openness in decisions on priority setting and stronger safeguards for patients.