Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Religion and Health 4/2014

01.08.2014 | Philosophical Exploration

Normal Functioning and the Treatment/Enhancement Distinction: An Opportunity Based Assessment

verfasst von: Jonathan Huggins, Mary Simmerling

Erschienen in: Journal of Religion and Health | Ausgabe 4/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

As genome mapping technology uncovers the roots of pathologic and physiologic human functioning, important questions are brought to the fore concerning our conceptualization of ideas such as disease, treatment, and enhancement. In 1985, Norman Daniels proposed a normal-functioning model that expands John Rawls’ theory of justice to obligate the provision of health care based on the constraints disease places on individual opportunity, but also limits the commitment of the medical establishment by focusing on states that represent deviations from normal human function. While some argue that the boundaries of medical institutions’ commitment to provide services within a normal-functioning model are arbitrary, the degree to which these concerns truly threaten the framework is often exaggerated in special cases put forward in the literature. Furthermore, the normal-functioning model provides a comprehensive basis for agreement in discussions of medicine’s commitment to the demands of social justice where resources are limited and avoids the dangerous overextension of the healthcare system and medicalization to which more expansive models are exposed.
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Barclay, L. (2009). Egalitarianism and responsibility in the genetic future. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 34(2), 119–134.PubMedCrossRef Barclay, L. (2009). Egalitarianism and responsibility in the genetic future. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 34(2), 119–134.PubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Boorse, C. (1975). On the distinction between disease and illness. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 5(1), 49–68. Boorse, C. (1975). On the distinction between disease and illness. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 5(1), 49–68.
Zurück zum Zitat Buchanan, A. E. (2000). From chance to choice: Genetics and justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Buchanan, A. E. (2000). From chance to choice: Genetics and justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Daniels, N. (2000). Normal Functioning and the Treatment-Enhancement Distinction. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 9.03. Daniels, N. (2000). Normal Functioning and the Treatment-Enhancement Distinction. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 9.03.
Zurück zum Zitat Daniels, N. (2001). Justice, health, and healthcare. American Journal of Bioethics, 1(2), 2–16.PubMedCrossRef Daniels, N. (2001). Justice, health, and healthcare. American Journal of Bioethics, 1(2), 2–16.PubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Daniels, N. (2008). Just Health. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Daniels, N. (2008). Just Health. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Holtug, N. (2009). Equality and the treatment-enhancement distinction. Bioethics, 25(3), 137–144.CrossRef Holtug, N. (2009). Equality and the treatment-enhancement distinction. Bioethics, 25(3), 137–144.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat McGee, G. (2000). Ethical Issues in Enhancement: An Introduction. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 9.03. McGee, G. (2000). Ethical Issues in Enhancement: An Introduction. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 9.03.
Zurück zum Zitat Murray, T. H. (2002). Reflections on the ethics of genetic enhancement. Genetics in Medicine, 4(Supplement), 27S–32S.PubMedCrossRef Murray, T. H. (2002). Reflections on the ethics of genetic enhancement. Genetics in Medicine, 4(Supplement), 27S–32S.PubMedCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Rawls, J. (1971). The basic structure as subject. American Philosophical Quarterly, 14(2), 159–165. Rawls, J. (1971). The basic structure as subject. American Philosophical Quarterly, 14(2), 159–165.
Zurück zum Zitat Steinbock, B., Arras, J. D., & London, A. J. (2003). Moral reasoning in the medical context. In B. Steinbock, J. D. Arras, & A. J. London (Eds.), Ethical issues in modern medicine (6th Edn.) (pp. 1–41). Boston: McGraw Hill. Steinbock, B., Arras, J. D., & London, A. J. (2003). Moral reasoning in the medical context. In B. Steinbock, J. D. Arras, & A. J. London (Eds.), Ethical issues in modern medicine (6th Edn.) (pp. 1–41). Boston: McGraw Hill.
Metadaten
Titel
Normal Functioning and the Treatment/Enhancement Distinction: An Opportunity Based Assessment
verfasst von
Jonathan Huggins
Mary Simmerling
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2014
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Journal of Religion and Health / Ausgabe 4/2014
Print ISSN: 0022-4197
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-6571
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-014-9882-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2014

Journal of Religion and Health 4/2014 Zur Ausgabe