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.
BMJ 2005;331 (5 November), doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7524.0-f
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
My brother raised an ethical dilemma over lunch last week. Should he give his private patients a prescription for Tamiflu (oseltamivir) if they ask for one while his NHS patients don't have that option? At the time I didn't have an answer, but Michael Jefford and colleagues provide some help in this week's BMJ (p 1075). Although the principle of distributive justice suggests he shouldn't offer something to some patients that others can't have, two other principles guiding medical ethicsbeneficence (acting in the patient's best interests) and respect for autonomydictate that he should. "Doctors should be committed to the individual patient's interests and autonomy rather than their own conception of social ideals such as equity," they say.
But Jefford and his colleagues are talking in the context of drugs for which the evidence is flimsy but supply is assured. Does their answer apply where supplies of a drug
Fiona Godlee, editor
(fgodlee@bmj.com)
Read all Rapid Responses
UK medical students have published unreleased government plans to restrict failed asylum seekers' access to medical care