Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Existential model may be better than scale that uses quality adjusted life years
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITOR
Problems with the valuation of life expectancy and quality
adjusted life years1 can be traced to the underlying philosophical paradigm. The quality adjusted life year paradigm is
based on 19th century classical utilitarianism. The greatest good is
perfect health, which is valued at 1; being dead (and the event of
death) has the value of 0. Other states are given values of <1; states
judged worse than death may be given negative values.2
This century, philosophers such as Martin Heidegger and Sir Karl Popper
have put forward ideas that differ from those of the utilitarians and
suggest an alternative model of how to value health. Heidegger's
premise is that we are unaware of things when they are normal; our
conscious concern is with the abnormal. For example, we are not aware
of using a door handle when we enter a room unless it is
broken.3 We are not consciously