The Secular Humanists of the Lowcountry

Join / Donate

All Forums > Ethics >


Jul 20 2009
Peter Singer's July editorial in the NYTimes

Peter Singer has a long but excellent editorial in the NYTimes entitled "Why we must Ration Health Care." Here's the link:

And here is an excerpt:

You have advanced kidney cancer. It will kill you, probably in the next year or two. A drug called Sutent slows the spread of the cancer and may give you an extra six months, but at a cost of $54,000. Is a few more months worth that much?

If you can afford it, you probably would pay that much, or more, to live longer, even if your quality of life wasn’t going to be good. But suppose it’s not you with the cancer but a stranger covered by your health-insurance fund. If the insurer provides this man — and everyone else like him — with Sutent, your premiums will increase. Do you still think the drug is a good value? Suppose the treatment cost a million dollars. Would it be worth it then? Ten million? Is there any limit to how much you would want your insurer to pay for a drug that adds six months to someone’s life? If there is any point at which you say, “No, an extra six months isn’t worth that much,” then you think that health care should be rationed.

Finally, someone is talking about this plainly.

Return to Ethics Forum
Return to Discussion Home

Webmaster: Alex Kasman 2016