Premium
The fairness of ventilator allocation during the COVID‐19 pandemic
Author(s) -
Wang Xueshi
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
bioethics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.494
H-Index - 55
eISSN - 1467-8519
pISSN - 0269-9702
DOI - 10.1111/bioe.12955
Subject(s) - lottery , equity (law) , individualism , outcome (game theory) , health care rationing , health equity , actuarial science , public economics , health care , covid-19 , public health , distributive justice , scarcity , economics , business , political science , medicine , economic growth , microeconomics , nursing , disease , law , market economy , pathology , infectious disease (medical specialty) , economic justice
There is ongoing debate on how to fairly allocate scarce critical care resources to patients with COVID‐19. The debate revolves around two views: those who believe that priority for scarce resources should primarily aim at saving the most lives (SML) or at saving the most life‐years, and those who believe that public health should focus on health equity to address health disparities and social determinants of health. I argue that maximizing medical outcomes by saving the greatest number of patients is not a plausible strategy for combating COVID‐19. There are reasons of fairness to give each patient who can meet general eligibility requirements a chance of being saved. Rather than focusing on outcome maximization, a better solution would be the individualist lottery that takes account of probability of survival and duration of treatment. Although the individualist lottery allocates scarce resources in a fair way that is responsive to health equity concerns, it still gives considerable weight to the concern of SML. Thus, this procedure can be reasonably accepted by all key stakeholders.