Skip to main content

Table 1 Seven requirements for legitimacy of clinical decisions with priority-setting consequences. From Bærøe [10]

From: Can clinical ethics committees be legitimate actors in bedside rationing?

 RequirementExplanation (conditions supported in parentheses)
1Self-reflectionExplicit reflection on applicable goals of healthcare and principles for distribution (supports condition (a))
2Search for all relevant argumentsIdentification of context- and patient-related reasons to justify deviation from guideline (b)
3ImpartialityRecognition of impartiality (a-b)
4Political consequencesRecognition of the political consequences of the claims put forward (c)
5Prioritised servicesA stable perception/justification of what kind of services the healthcare service should prioritise (c)
6Reasonable justificationJustification of claims on healthcare so that they would be acceptable to colleagues sharing this aim of justification (d)
7Professional self-regulationInstitutionalisation of requirements 1–6 supports all four conditions (a-d) and makes the performers accountable towards health authorities and stakeholders