A Kantian argument in favor of unimpeded access to health care.

F Heubel
{"title":"A Kantian argument in favor of unimpeded access to health care.","authors":"F Heubel","doi":"10.1007/BF00998545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The principle that everybody should have access to essential health care is in conflict with the notion that property rights should be respected. The Kantian doctrine of rights is explored in order to solve this conflict. Kant's notion of a legislative will is explained and used to show the inherent limits of the legal terms \"property\" and \"ownership\" (it can refer only to things external to subjects and to possible objects of choice). What is internal to the subject is outside of the realm of the legislative will. A law excluding those unable to pay from access to essential health care would not be just. A law granting that access would be just.</p>","PeriodicalId":77444,"journal":{"name":"Theoretical medicine","volume":"16 2","pages":"199-213"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/BF00998545","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theoretical medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00998545","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The principle that everybody should have access to essential health care is in conflict with the notion that property rights should be respected. The Kantian doctrine of rights is explored in order to solve this conflict. Kant's notion of a legislative will is explained and used to show the inherent limits of the legal terms "property" and "ownership" (it can refer only to things external to subjects and to possible objects of choice). What is internal to the subject is outside of the realm of the legislative will. A law excluding those unable to pay from access to essential health care would not be just. A law granting that access would be just.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
赞成不受阻碍地获得医疗保健的康德式论点。
人人都应享有基本保健的原则与应当尊重财产权的观念相冲突。康德的权利学说就是为了解决这一矛盾。康德的立法意志的概念被解释和用来显示法律术语“财产”和“所有权”的内在局限性(它只能指主体之外的事物和可能的选择对象)。主体内部的东西不在立法意志的范围之内。一项将无力支付的人排除在基本医疗服务之外的法律是不公正的。法律允许这样做是公正的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editor's note Sociophysiology as the basic science of psychiatry. Organic unity theory: an integrative mind-body theory for psychiatry. Intersubjectivity in Wittgenstein and Freud: other minds and the foundations of psychiatry. Cultural and historical aspects of eating disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1