Essay Sample on Justice: Exploring its Three Facets to Advance Understanding

Introduction

Justice is one topic that has been present and discussed ever since in the past. It is an area that has attracted different evaluations and understanding with various cultures having their view and practice of justice. In recent times, justice has been perceived primarily through three distinct faces; they include procedural justice, interactional justice, and lastly the distributive justice. For better and conscious understanding and liberation of this topic on justice, we must go back to the 1960s and 70s where the whole ideology of justice was first formally conceived and done a practice among the people. The earliest origins of justice can be traced back to the social exchange theory, which purported that any relationship was made up of sharing of interactions that resulted in social and economic outcomes.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The topic of distributive justice in resource allocation has been significant concern over the year, especially in America. The dilemma that has since surrounded the justice allocation of health care resources has seen lawmakers and the people enter into conversations on the way forward. Distribution of such funds and the means to which the funds are prioritized to the various patients' and service codes remains an ethical dilemma on the type of health system the community gets. It is without question that health care providers will not be provided with the right amount of resources that can fully satisfy the demands of the community, which continue to get educated and informed on the same. The article will thus look into the issue of justice and how it relates to the allocation and distribution of health resources. The essay evaluates the theoretical body of delivery into the practice setting that has been the first cause in the American health system (Daniels, N., & Sabin, J. 1997).

The Ethical Question in Resource Allocation

The most profound moral issue in this view is how the hospitals are going to deal with the escalating demand on the limited resource of health services and ensure that quality services are still administered to the public. The ethical dilemma that exists, in this case, rests upon the decision on how the additional health resources could be allocated to the public and on what basis. It, therefore, begs to present the following question:

• Who receives them and under what criteria?
• Who delivers them?
• What kind of service will be available?
• How will financing be distributed?
• How will control and power be distributed?

The environment of healthcare is subject to several influencing factors with political influence being the most prevalent one. In the quest to handle the ethical question of resource allocation, it is essential that the political environment b invited because they are the wing of the government that administers the policies on the health and resource allocation. The political arena plays a very important in this case, and therefore the ethical dilemma on the distribution and financing of the health system rests upon the political chain (Flew, A. 1984).

Justice and the Health System

Distributive justice sets as the appropriate setting for the consideration of what areas can define a health system. Four various theories of distribution will be used to relate to health care. They are theories that have been applied in many health care system setting, for instance, in Geelong Hospital. The four methods include; libertarianism, egalitarianism, communitarianism, and Utilitarianism.

Libertarianism

In the literal view, liberty is the freedom of will. Libertarian theory is adored by the free marketers who much believe in the power of the market for the satisfaction of their various basic human wants. Any case that suggests imposed equalization scenario or the social intervention is viewed as an anathema to those who subscribe to libertarianism as it is a threat to their liberty as individuals. The best definition of a health system that is based on this type of theory of resource allocation is the importance to have health insurance or the alternative having the required resources to pay for the services. The United States of America boasts of a well-established health system that is found based on this theory. With the system, without evaluating the social function of Medicaid and Medicare, there remains an excess of 35 million individuals who cannot fully pay for their health services (Boyd, K. M. 1979).

The ideology of the theory assumes that patients are their judges when it comes to welfare with set priorities that are manifested and self-determined through paying. Patient's access and ability to access health services are no congruent, and therefore, the result becomes unequal distribution of services. The theory does not cater for those disadvantaged by the redistribution of assets of the society, and thus, it becomes tough to embrace such a concept.

Egalitarianism

It is at the theory of distributive justice that emphasizes the distribution of both the burdens and social benefits. There are two principles identified with this theory that is related to institutions, that is; "each has an equal right to the most expensive general system of equal basic liberties that are compatible with an equal system of liberty for everyone." The second principle states that "economic and social inequalities are to be categorized so that they are, first, to the benefit of those least advantaged and second, to be open to everyone under situations of fair opportunity." The above-set principles provide the most luring description of egalitarianism as they present the ideology of fairness, opportunity, and equity (Holm, S. 1995).

The theory is equally supported since it presents the not discriminating aspects of jut society. However, its mode of application in the allocation of resources proves to be very problematic. The ideal objective of having a just chance to acquire health services means that the ability of the system to provide the services which cannot always be possible. Rationing thus needs to be influenced in a fair means for there to be no discrimination in the area of service even when discrimination between two competing services might occur (Badiou, A. 2002).

Communitarianism

It is a theory that explains as a community-endorsed basis that explains justice being administered by the communitarianism theory. The theory is grounded on community-driven standards that try to evaluate the 'virtuous,' 'right' or 'good' in line with certain traditions and social context. It does not, however, directly translate into a better system that ensures equality for everyone at all times. If the community agrees on an agreement that sets specific procedures as low for whatever the reason, then the individual in need of the process may be excluded from health services. In the state of Oregon, USA, for instance, a study was conducted by the state to set priorities of health service on a large scale. It was a process to solicit public opinion. A conference was then held in 1988 for advocating for the allocation of health resources on the view of public attitudes that would quantify the trade-off of quality of life and quantity of life.

Utilitarianism

The utilitarian theory seeks to identify the right results to everyone concerned or as commonly know, to bring the highest good to the most significant number. The approach maximizes the public utility in the quest for the greater good in the community. Potential disadvantaged individuals are present since the marginal society who have little to offer the organization but are if the high propensity for health resource consumption is the most difficult to justify in this scenario. The utilitarian theory has its role to play in the equal resource allocation in that it the beneficiaries of the chosen resource will in definition be in the setting of the greater good and be in the position to take a higher moral right. However, that perception is only a part of the ideology since the outcome of treatment which is most relevant.

Conclusion

In the allocation of health resources to the well established and developed nations like the United States, policymakers in such communities must adopt a policy of distribution. The procedures should either explicitly or implicitly refl3ct upon the broader theories of resource distribution. The United States government intends to implement the same approach to ensure that no citizen pays for healthcare and that everyone poor or rich have access to health services. The increased demand for health care service across the nation has had the administration to seek means through which they can fully implement their act through resource distribution. A just health system must be involved in the achieving of distribution efficiency directed at maximizing the effectiveness of resources for the purpose to achieve an optimal community outcome.

References

Badiou, A. (2002). Ethics: An essay on the understanding of evil. Verso.

Boyd, K. M. (1979). The ethics of resource allocation in health care. Edinburgh University Press, 22 George Square, Edinburgh.

Daniels, N., & Sabin, J. (1997). Limits to health care: fair procedures, democratic deliberation, and the legitimacy problem for insurers. Philosophy & public affairs, 26(4), 303-350.

Flew, A. (1984). A Dictionary of Philosophy: Revised Second Edition. Macmillan.

Holm, S. (1995). Not just autonomy--the principles of American biomedical ethics. Journal of medical ethics, 21(6), 332-338.