The Ethical Basis of Severity as a Priority Setting Criterion in Healthcare-Egalitarian or Prioritarian?

This research paper examines the moral foundations for using severity of illness as a priority-setting criterion in healthcare. The authors argue that prioritarianism, which gives greater weight to improving the health of the worse off, is superior to egalitarianism. Egalitarianism faces several challenges, including the need for a non-equality-based reference level, the problem of irrelevant alternatives, and excessive complexity. In contrast, prioritarianism aligns better with the concept of severity and provides a clear rationale for always having a reason to improve someone's health. The findings have important implications for how healthcare resources should be allocated to maximize societal wellbeing. The analysis is limited to the theoretical debate, and further empirical research is needed to understand how these principles play out in real-world policy decisions.