BMJ 1995;310:686 (18 March)

Editorials

Rationing: the debate we have to have

Britain needs a nationwide, prolonged, systematic debate on rationing

Britain was transfixed last week by two stories that were primarily about the rationing of health care. In one case a court ruled that Cambridge Health Authority did not have to offer a second bone marrow transplant to a 10 year old child dying of leukaemia (p 0000). In the other case a man with a severe head injury was flown 320 km by helicopter to a neurosurgical unit because none of the many nearer units could take him (p 0000). The media were filled with these stories, and the debate over rationing exploded into life once again. Unfortunately--because the government is unwilling to be candid on rationing--the debate is likely to die down until we have yet another dreadful case. We need a much better debate.

The medical press has been debating rationing in health care for more than a . . . [Full text of this article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Medical profession should develop consensus on health priorities via debates
Iain J Robbe
BMJ 1995 311: 264. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Harvey, I. (1996). Commentary: Reach beyond metaphor to assess value. BMJ 313: 154-154 [Full text]  
  • Entwistle, V. A, Watt, I. S, Bradbury, R., Pehl, L. J (1996). Media coverage of the Child B case. BMJ 312: 1587-1591 [Full text]  
  • Price, D. (1996). Lessons for health care rationing from the case of child B. BMJ 312: 167-169 [Full text]  
  • Weindling, A M. (1995). Ethics and economics of health care. BMJ 310: 1671c-1672 [Full text]  
Access all current jobs at BMJ Group
Whats new online at Student BMJ
Listen to the latest BMJ Interview