Findings from University of Bergen Broaden Understanding of Health Insurance (Newborn health benefits or financial risk protection? An ethical…

Findings from University of Bergen Broaden Understanding of Health Insurance (Newborn health benefits or financial risk protection? An ethical analysis of a real-life dilemma in a setting without universal health coverage)

By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Managed Care Weekly Digest -- Researchers detail new data in Health Insurance. According to news reporting originating from Bergen, Norway, by NewsRx correspondents, research stated, "High healthcare costs make illness precarious for both patients and their families' economic situation. Despite the recent focus on the interconnection between health and financial risk at the systemic level, the ethical conflict between concerns for potential health benefits and financial risk protection at the household level in a low-income setting is less understood."

Financial support for this research came from Norges Forskningsrad (see also Health Insurance).

Our news editors obtained a quote from the research from the University of Bergen, "Using a seven-step ethical analysis, we examine a real-life dilemma faced by families and health workers at the micro level in Ethiopia and analyse the acceptability of limiting treatment for an ill newborn to protect against financial risk. We assess available evidence and ethical issues at stake and discuss the dilemma with respect to three priority setting criteria: health maximisation, priority to the worse-off and financial risk protection. Giving priority to health maximisation and extra priority to the worse-off suggests, in this particular case, that limiting treatment is not acceptable even if the total well-being gain from reduced financial risk is taken into account. Our conclusion depends on the facts of the case and the relative weight assigned to these criteria. However, there are problematic aspects with the premise of this dilemma. The most affected parties-the newborn, family members and health worker-cannot make free choices about whether to limit treatment or not, and we thereby accept deprivations of people's substantive freedoms. In settings where healthcare is financed largely out-of-pocket, families and health workers face tragic trade-offs."

According to the news editors, the research concluded: "As countries move towards universal health coverage, financial risk protection for high-priority services is necessary to promote fairness, improve health and reduce poverty."

For more information on this research see: Newborn health benefits or financial risk protection? An ethical analysis of a real-life dilemma in a setting without universal health coverage. Journal of Medical Ethics, 2018;44(8):524-530. Journal of Medical Ethics can be contacted at: Bmj Publishing Group, British Med Assoc House, Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9JR, England. (BMJ Publishing Group - group.bmj.com/; Journal of Medical Ethics - jme.bmj.com/)

The news editors report that additional information may be obtained by contacting K.H. Onarheim, University of Bergen, Dept. of Global Public Hlth & Primary Care, N-5020 Bergen, Norway. Additional authors for this research include O.F. Norheim and I. Miljeteig.

The direct object identifier (DOI) for that additional information is: https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2017-104438. This DOI is a link to an online electronic document that is either free or for purchase, and can be your direct source for a journal article and its citation.

Keywords for this news article include: Bergen, Norway, Europe, Investment and Finance, Risk and Prevention, Health and Medicine, Health Insurance, University of Bergen.

Our reports deliver fact-based news of research and discoveries from around the world. Copyright 2018, NewsRx LLC