25 February 2013

Two Bombastic Questions Regarding Global Healthcare

1) Would it be more helpful to view the current lack of healthcare in certain areas of the world not from a cultural or anthropological perspective, but rather from an economic perspective?  In other words, how may a bioethics from below reckon with both a “westernizing” cultural imperialism, while at the same time taking into account the severe lack of health care in certain “developed nations” in the west (i.e. Russia, certain parts of the United States)?

2) Is it really true, as Keane alleges, that health crises affect all people?  Of course there are catastrophic health emergencies that stem from either genetic or biological defects, but aren’t there a whole series of maladies that affect primarily, if not exclusively the poor?  Are judgments as to the standard of care provided in one place or another based upon economic conditions moral?  How may one really take the preferential option for the poor seriously?  Does this “option” suggest that any type of care be provided, or does it actually suggest that the poor are deserving of the best care?

No comments: