title: [What kind of debate on prioritisation do we need for the benefit of our health system and society?].
abstract: The debate on prioritisation aims to generate broad consensus on the social distribution of health care goods. There is nothing wrong with this aim but the political debate around it should include a discussion whether prioritisation is the strategy needed to realize this goal. Obviously, prioritisation follows the currently prevalent logic of evaluation as a universal legitimating strategy but, due to its multiple and unforeseeable effects, this does not necessarily imply that prioritisation will deliver on its promises. Hence, the debate cannot be focused on the appropriate strategies of prioritisation as its proponents seem to intend, but must also include the social costs and potentially adversary effects of this strategy of rationalisation. (As supplied by publisher).
authors.affiliation: Institut für Medizingeschichte und Wissenschaftsforschung, Universität zu Lübeck. borck@imgwf.uni-luebeck.de
authors.forename: Cornelius
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Borck
mesh_terms: D005858:Germany; D015276:Health Care Rationing / Q000458:organization & administration; D006292:Health Priorities / Q000458:organization & administration*; D006297:Health Services Accessibility / Q000458:organization & administration; D006301:Health Services Needs and Demand / Q000458:organization & administration; D054625:Healthcare Disparities / Q000458:organization & administration; D006801:Humans; D009313:National Health Programs / Q000458:organization & administration*; D011057:Politics; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care / Q000458:organization & administration