'Inglan is a bitch': hostile NHS charging regulations contravene the ethical principles of the medical profession

J Med Ethics. 2019 Aug;45(8):497-503. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2019-105419. Epub 2019 Jul 22.

Abstract

Following the recent condemnation of the National Health Service charging regulations by medical colleges and the UK Faculty of Public Health, we demonstrate that through enactment of this policy, the medical profession is betraying its core ethical principles. Through dissection of the policy using Beauchamp and Childress' framework, a disrespect for autonomy becomes evident in the operationalisation of the charging regulations, just as a disregard for confidentiality was apparent in the data sharing Memorandum of Understanding. Negative consequences of the regulations are documented to highlight their importance for clinical decision makers under the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. Exploration of the principle of justice illuminates the core differentiation between the border-bound duties of the State and borderless duties of the clinician, exposing a fundamental tension.

Keywords: allocation of healthcare resources; autonomy; ethics; minorities; right to healthcare.

Publication types

  • Historical Article

MeSH terms

  • Beneficence
  • Case-Control Studies
  • Decision Making
  • Eligibility Determination / ethics*
  • Eligibility Determination / legislation & jurisprudence
  • Emigration and Immigration* / legislation & jurisprudence
  • Emigration and Immigration* / statistics & numerical data
  • Government Regulation
  • Health Services Accessibility / ethics
  • Health Services Accessibility / statistics & numerical data*
  • History, 20th Century
  • Humans
  • Moral Obligations
  • Personal Autonomy
  • Physician-Patient Relations
  • Social Justice / ethics*
  • Social Welfare
  • State Medicine* / ethics
  • State Medicine* / legislation & jurisprudence
  • United Kingdom / epidemiology
  • Vulnerable Populations / ethnology
  • West Indies / epidemiology