Rationing in general practice: Commentary: Courageous attempt, but needs clarificationBMJ 1996; 312 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7045.1532 (Published 15 June 1996) Cite this as: BMJ 1996;312:1532
- Peter Dormer, writera
- a307 Seddon House, London EC2Y 8BX
The Asbury draft policy is a courageous and decent attempt at clarifying the ways that difficult moral decisions on treatment could be taken in general practice. The document is muddled, however, and Crisp et al swing between moral high handedness and hand wringing uncertainty.
I do not believe that Crisp et al have sorted out what they mean when (a) they argue that they want to allow patients as much say as possible in their treatment and (b) they say that they believe a plurality of values is necessary in making rational decisions. They give an example of a patient being offered two treatments, each with different side effects, with one treatment costing slightly more …
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Register for a free trial to thebmj.com to receive unlimited access to all content on thebmj.com for 14 days.
Sign up for a free trial