Ethical dilemmas for general practitioners under the UK new contract.
- 1 September 1994
- journal article
- research article
- Published by BMJ in Journal of Medical Ethics
- Vol. 20 (3) , 175-180
- https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.20.3.175
Abstract
Possible distributive justice frameworks for providing health care by general practitioners are discussed. The ethical considerations before and after the recent changes to the British National Health Service are contrasted, with particular emphasis on a possible ethical divide that has been produced between fund-holding and non-fund-holding general practitioners. It is argued that general practitioners in non-fund-holding practices can continue as ethical advocates for their patients and distribute health care within an egalitarian framework. However, those in fund-holding practices may now be seen as interest advocates and may have to practise utilitarian distributive justice. Patient groups may be needed to ensure that these general practitioners are seen to act justly in the distribution of the health care resources for which they are now responsible.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- US health care. I: The access problem.BMJ, 1992
- Budget holding in Calverton: one year on.BMJ, 1992
- Some Ethical Costs of RationingLaw, Medicine and Health Care, 1992
- Budget holding: the first 150 days in Calverton.BMJ, 1991
- Medical ethics for the 21st centuryJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1991
- The new NHS. Budget holding: a step into the unknown.BMJ, 1991
- Health Care Rationing: A Problem in Ethics and PolicyJournal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 1989
- Ethical issues in primary health care: A survey of practitioners' perceptionsJournal of Community Health, 1989
- Referral to hospital: can we do better?BMJ, 1988
- Doctors and patients.BMJ, 1986