Draft Essay
Healthcare and Nursing - Social Justice in Healthcare Distribution
Practicing adequate social justice while distribution of healthcare funds amongst the
most deserving and needy cases, is an arduous task. While distributing these funds, it is
essential to take a paradigm view of the situation, and then making decisions without
any social or racial bias. In the given scenario, looking at all the given cases and making
a decision regarding which patient deserves to be saved; was an eye-opening
experience for me indeed.
In my opinion, patient C deserves to receive the funds. My rationale behind this decision
is pretty logical and simple. In case of patient A, the fact that the patient is quite old and
has already lived 70 years of his life, makes it hard for me to choose him. The patient
has already exceeded the average global lifespan (Brockmann, 2002), and investing
one million dollars in saving his life would leave me regretful for the younger patients in
need of funds. In case of patient B, the life expectancy of the toddler is only until
teenage; which means that the funds would not be well-invested here. Now, in case of
patient D, the patient is going to be completely dependent on the hepatitis drug given to
him. This means that patient D would be able to live normally only until three years, until
the funds will last. The expenditure of the hepatitis drug as described in the case is
30,000 dollars per month. Hence, there is going to be no backup or guarantee for the
hospital to ensure that it has saved a life successfully in the longer run or not. Now,
lastly, in case of patient E who is a premature baby, the chances of survival at best are
only 20%. Moreover, the total sum of the baby’s 12-month stay is going to exceed the
hospital’s currently available funds. Hence, in case of patient E, the hospital funds will
Healthcare and Nursing - Social Justice in Healthcare Distribution
Practicing adequate social justice while distribution of healthcare funds amongst the
most deserving and needy cases, is an arduous task. While distributing these funds, it is
essential to take a paradigm view of the situation, and then making decisions without
any social or racial bias. In the given scenario, looking at all the given cases and making
a decision regarding which patient deserves to be saved; was an eye-opening
experience for me indeed.
In my opinion, patient C deserves to receive the funds. My rationale behind this decision
is pretty logical and simple. In case of patient A, the fact that the patient is quite old and
has already lived 70 years of his life, makes it hard for me to choose him. The patient
has already exceeded the average global lifespan (Brockmann, 2002), and investing
one million dollars in saving his life would leave me regretful for the younger patients in
need of funds. In case of patient B, the life expectancy of the toddler is only until
teenage; which means that the funds would not be well-invested here. Now, in case of
patient D, the patient is going to be completely dependent on the hepatitis drug given to
him. This means that patient D would be able to live normally only until three years, until
the funds will last. The expenditure of the hepatitis drug as described in the case is
30,000 dollars per month. Hence, there is going to be no backup or guarantee for the
hospital to ensure that it has saved a life successfully in the longer run or not. Now,
lastly, in case of patient E who is a premature baby, the chances of survival at best are
only 20%. Moreover, the total sum of the baby’s 12-month stay is going to exceed the
hospital’s currently available funds. Hence, in case of patient E, the hospital funds will
