|
| 內容簡介： |
Dr Keith Syrett argues for a reappraisal of the role of public
law adjudication in questions of healthcare rationing. As
governments worldwide turn to explicit rationing strategies to
manage the mismatch between demand for and supply of health
services and treatments, disappointed patients and the public have
sought to contest the moral authority of bodies making rationing
decisions. This has led to the growing involvement of law in this
field of public policy. The author argues that, rather than
bemoaning this development, those working within the health policy
community should recognise the points of confluence between the
principles and purposes of public law and the proposals which have
been made to address rationing''s ''legitimacy problem''. Drawing upon
jurisprudence from England, Canada and South Africa, the book
evaluates the capacity of courts to establish the conditions for a
process of public deliberation from which legitimacy for healthcare
rationing may be derived.
|
| 目錄：
|
1. Introduction
2. Why ''ration'' healthcare resources?
3. How rationing takes place
4. Rationing and the problem of legitimacy
5. Rationing and the courts: theoretical perspectives
6. Rationing in the courts: England
7. Rationing in the courts: Canada
8. Rationing in the courts: South Africa
9. Conclusion
|
|
購物車/收銀台(0) | 在線留言板
| 付款方式
| 聯絡我們
| 運費計算
| 幫助中心 |
加入書簽
HOME
新書上架
