首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Medical Ethics >Altruism blood donation and public policy: a reply to Keown.
【2h】

Altruism blood donation and public policy: a reply to Keown.

机译:利他主义无偿献血和公共政策:对基恩的回复。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This is a continuation of and a development of a debate between John Keown and me. The issue discussed is whether, in Britain, an unpaid system of blood donation promotes and is justified by its promotion of altruism. Doubt is cast on the notions that public policies can, and, if they can, that they should, be aimed at the promotion and expression of altruism rather than of self-interest, especially that of a mercenary sort. Reflections upon President Kennedy's proposition, introduced into the debate by Keown, that we should ask not what our country can do for us but what we can do for our country is pivotal to this casting of doubt. A case is made for suggesting that advocacy along the lines which Keown presents of an exclusive reliance on a voluntary, unpaid system of blood donation encourages inappropriate attitudes towards the provision of health care. Perhaps, it is suggested, and the suggestion represents, on my part, a change of mind as a consequence of the debate, a dual system of blood provision might be preferable.
机译:这是约翰·基恩和我之间辩论的延续和发展。讨论的问题是,在英国,无偿献血制度是否能够促进无私奉献,并因其无私奉献而得到证明。人们怀疑公共政策是否可以,如果可以的话,应该以促进和表达利他主义而不是出于个人利益,尤其是雇佣军利益,来进行怀疑。基恩在辩论中对肯尼迪总统的主张提出的反思是,我们不应该问我们的国家能为我们做些什么,而我们可以为我们的国家做些什么对这种怀疑至关重要。有理由认为,按照基恩提出的完全依赖自愿,无偿献血系统的主张进行宣传,会鼓励人们对提供医疗保健的态度不当。也许有人建议这样做,而就我而言,这种建议代表着由于辩论而改变了主意,最好采用双重供血制度。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号