title: Should basic care get priority? Doubts about rationing the Oregon way.
abstract: Recognition of the need to ration care has focused attention on the concept of "basic care." It is often thought that care that is "basic" is also morally prior. This article questions that premise in light of the usual definitions of "basic." Specifically, it argues that Oregon's rationing scheme, which defines "basic" in terms of cost-effective care, fails to pay sufficient attention to important ethical principles such as justice.
authors: Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University.
authors: R M
authors: RM
authors: Veatch
mesh_terms: D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003657:Decision Making; D015276:Health Care Rationing / Q000592:standards*; D009014:Morals; D009922:Oregon; D018579:Patient Selection; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D011314:Preventive Health Services / Q000600:supply & distribution; D011788:Quality of Life; D040841:Resource Allocation; D012935:Social Justice; D012945:Social Values; D013221:State Health Plans / Q000592:standards*; D014481:United States; D026712:Value of Life