The trade-off metaphor in priority setting: A comment on lubbe and daniels

Abstract

One merit of a compendium such as the present one lies in its potential to encompass different perspectives on a subject. It has the capacity to mirror the complexity of the topic, thus enabling the reader to evaluate the diverse arguments presented and to draw her own conclusions. This is not to say that she or he may not appreciate a little assistance in this process. Providing this help with regard to the contributions of Weyma Lübbe and Norman Daniels to this volume is the aim of the present paper. More precisely, it seeks to strengthen and complement Lübbe’s (see chapter “Social Value Maximization and the Multiple Goals Assumption: Is Priority Setting a Maximizing Task at All?”) critique of the “multiple goals assumption” in healthcare resource allocation - i.e., the idea that health policy has at least two goals: fostering efficiency and distributing resources fairly - and to establish a connection between her considerations and Daniels’ (see chapter “Accountability for Reasonableness and Priority Setting in Health”) account. That being said, the paper is also accessible and worth reading for those readers who are unfamiliar with the papers by Lübbe and Daniels, because, first, the latter’s relevant aspects will be summarized and, second, the paper makes some general points and provides a relevant contribution to the priority setting debate on its own.