Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 1995 Oct;85(10):1439-45.
doi: 10.2105/ajph.85.10.1439.

Rationing health care and the need for credible scarcity: why Americans can't say no

Affiliations
Review

Rationing health care and the need for credible scarcity: why Americans can't say no

W K Mariner. Am J Public Health. 1995 Oct.

Abstract

With adequate cost containment unlikely in the foreseeable future, health care use will have to be curtailed, ideally with open and explicit criteria for equitably allocating resources or rationing. Yet, consensus on any such criteria appears remote because Americans cannot say no to health care. Americans may refuse to accept rationing for two reasons. The absence of any global limitation on health care resources may encourage patients to believe that health care resources are not scarce and do not need to be rationed. A belief in vitalism--that everyone is morally entitled to unlimited longevity and good health--may discourage setting limits on one's own care. Together, these characteristics may foster the belief that denials of health care services, especially by health insurers, are arbitrary or unfair refusals to pay for existing resources and not a necessary method of rationing scarce resources. If this hypothesis is true, Americans are unlikely to achieve consensus on any equitable allocation of health care unless they face an actual shortage (credible scarcity) of health care resources that makes it necessary to ration care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. J Relig Ethics. 1974 Spring;2(1):11-32 - PubMed
    1. Am J Law Med. 1994;20(4):357-94 - PubMed
    1. Hastings Cent Rep. 1976 Feb;6(1):29-34 - PubMed
    1. Hastings Cent Rep. 1976 Feb;6(1):34-7 - PubMed
    1. J Med Philos. 1979 Sep;4(3):313-33 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources