title: Advocacy and rationing are compatible.
abstract: In his paper, Peter Ubel attempts to make the case for "bedside rationing" by clinicians in order to help control healthcare costs. This commentary addresses a number of conceptual, logical and linguistic problems with Dr. Ubel's paper, challenges his apparently "heretical" view of advocacy, but provides additional support for his central claim that physicians should do bedside rationing.
authors.affiliation: Logic and Critical Thinking, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, USA.
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Gratton
mesh_terms: D003363:Cost Control; D003657:Decision Making / Q000941:ethics; D026690:Ethics, Clinical; D020793:Gatekeeping / Q000941:ethics*; D017048:Health Care Costs; D015276:Health Care Rationing / Q000941:ethics*; D006801:Humans; D028681:Moral Obligations; D010344:Patient Advocacy / Q000941:ethics*; D017009:Professional Autonomy; D012941:Social Responsibility