The aim of this study was to investigate the ethical dilemma of prioritising financial resources to expensive biological therapies. For this purpose, the four principles of biomedical ethics formulated by ethicists Tom Beauchamp and James Childress were used as a theoretical framework. Based on arguments of justice, Beauchamp and Childress advocate for a health care system organised in line with the Danish system. Notably, our study was carried out in a Danish setting.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
D. M.Ecker, S. D.Jones, and H. L.Levine, ‘The Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibody Market’, mAbs7 no. 1 (2015): 9-14.
2.
T. L.Beauchamp and J. F.Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 7th edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013): at 249-301 (Chapter: Justice).
3.
The Danish Council on Ethics (Det Etiske Råd), Just Prioritisation in the Danish Health Care System (Retfærdig prioritering i det danske sundhedsvæsen), Copenhagen, 2018.
4.
The Danish Council on Ethics (Det Etiske Råd), Just Prioritisation in the Danish Health Care System—Background (Retfærdig prioritering i det danske sundhedsvæsen - baggrundsnotat), Copenhagen, 2018.
Bioethics Commission, Federal Chancellery, Medicine and Economics—Opinion of the Bioethics Commission, Vienna, 2018.
7.
The German Ethics Council, Medical Benefits and Costs in Healthcare: The Normative Role of their Evaluation, Berlin, 2013.
8.
R.Durvasula, J.Kelly, A.Schleyer, B. D.Anawalt, S.Somani, and T. H.Dellit, “Standardized Review and Approval Process for High-Cost Medication Use Promotes Value-Based Care in a Large Academic Medical System,”American Health & Drug Benefits11, no. 2 (2018): 65-73.
9.
G.Maio, “Can Help for Patients be too Expensive? Ethical Considerations and End-Stage Lung Disease,”Respiration82, no. 5 (2011): 395-399.
10.
Id.
11.
E.Nord, “The Desirability of a Condition Versus the Well Being and Worth of a Person,”Health Economics10, no. 7 (2001): 579-581.
12.
Beauchamp and Childress, supra note 2, at 202-248 (Chapter: Beneficence).
13.
T. L.Beauchamp and J. F.Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 7th edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013).
14.
Beauchamp and Childress, supra note 13, at 1-25 (Chapter: Moral Norms).
15.
F. A.Santoro, M. J.Rothe, and B. E.Strober, “Ethical Considerations when Prescribing Biologics in Dermatology,”Clinics in Dermatology30, no. 5 (2012): 492-495.
16.
Id.
17.
L. M.Fleck and M.Danis, “How Should Therapeutic Decisions about Expensive Drugs Be Made in Imperfect Environments?”AMA Journal of Ethics19, no. 2 (2017): 147-156.
18.
Id.
19.
Beauchamp and Childress, supra note 13.
20.
M.Ebbesen and B. D.Pedersen, “Empirical Investigation of the Ethical Reasoning of Physicians and Molecular Biologists—the Importance of the Four Principles of Biomedical Ethics,”Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine2, no. 23 (2007): 1-16.
R.Gamez-Belmonte, C.Hernandez-Chirlaque, M.Arredondo-Amador, C. J.Aranda, R.Gonzalez, O.Martinez-Augustin, and F.Sanchez de Medina, “Biosimilars: Concepts and Controversies,”Pharmacological Research133 (2018): 251-264.
27.
A.Hey, “History and Practice: Antibodies in Infectious Diseases,”Microbiology Spectrum3, no. 2 (2015): 1-15.
C.A.Dendrou, L.Fugger, and M.A.Friese, “Immunopathology of Multiple Sclerosis,”Nature Reviews Immunology15, no. 9 (2015): 545-558.
32.
Beauchamp and Childress, supra note 13.
33.
Beauchamp and Childress, supra note 13, at 30-55 (chapter: Moral Character).
34.
T. L.Beauchamp, “A Defense of the Common Morality,”Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal13, no. 3 (2003): 259-274.
35.
T. L.Beauchamp, “Informed Consent: Its History, Meaning, and Present Challenges,”Cambridge Quarterly Healthcare Ethics20, no. 4 (2011): 515-523.
36.
Beauchamp, supra note 34.
37.
A.Halkoaho, A. M.Pietila, M.Ebbesen, S.Karki, and M.Kangasniemi, “Cultural Aspects Related to Informed Consent in Health Research: A Systematic Review,”Nursing Ethics23, no. 6 (2016): 698-712.
38.
Beauchamp, supra note 35.
39.
Beauchamp and Childress, supra note 13, at 101-149 (Chapter: Respect for Autonomy).
40.
Id.
41.
Id.
42.
Beauchamp and Childress, supra note 13, Preface to the seventh edition.
43.
S.Holm, “Not Just Autonomy—The Principles of American Biomedical Ethics,”Journal of Medical Ethics21, no. 6 (1995): 332-338.
44.
Beauchamp, supra note 34.
45.
D.Silverman, Doing Qualitative Research (London: Sage, 2013): at 141-158 (Chapter: How many cases do you need).
46.
A.Lindseth and A.Norberg, “A Phenomenological Hermeneutical Method for Researching Lived Experience,”Scandinavian Journal of Caring Science18, no. 2 (2004): 145-153.
47.
M.Ebbesen and B. D.Pedersen, “Using Empirical Research to Formulate Normative Ethical Principles in Biomedicine,”Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy10, no 1 (2007): 3-48.
48.
Beauchamp and Childress, supra note 2, at 101-149 (Chapter: Respect for Autonomy).
