Is the treatment/enhancement distinction useful?

N. Fost, D. B. Allen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

It is appealing and common to try to resolve complex ethical dilemmas with simple definitions. Ten years ago, it was widely suggested that whether a child was entitled to treatment with growth hormone (GH) could be resolved by asking whether she or he had the disease called GH deficiency (GHD). The position is no longer prevalent, as treatment is common for many children without GHD. A more recent trend attempts to resolve the issue by distinguishing "treatment" from "enhancement," holding that enhancement is not a proper role of medicine, or at least not an entitlement. This distinction also fails because of ambiguity about the definition of the terms, and because the terms do not seem morally relevant. Many clear "treatments" are not owed to people, and many "enhancements" are widely considered to be entitlements.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalEndocrinologist
Volume11
Issue number4 SUPPL.
StatePublished - 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Growth Hormone
Therapeutics
Medicine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Endocrinology

Cite this

Fost, N., & Allen, D. B. (2001). Is the treatment/enhancement distinction useful? Endocrinologist, 11(4 SUPPL.).

Is the treatment/enhancement distinction useful? / Fost, N.; Allen, D. B.

In: Endocrinologist, Vol. 11, No. 4 SUPPL., 2001.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fost, N & Allen, DB 2001, 'Is the treatment/enhancement distinction useful?', Endocrinologist, vol. 11, no. 4 SUPPL..
Fost, N. ; Allen, D. B. / Is the treatment/enhancement distinction useful?. In: Endocrinologist. 2001 ; Vol. 11, No. 4 SUPPL.
@article{454b4ee5d6b944089bdafc9e57474c8d,
title = "Is the treatment/enhancement distinction useful?",
abstract = "It is appealing and common to try to resolve complex ethical dilemmas with simple definitions. Ten years ago, it was widely suggested that whether a child was entitled to treatment with growth hormone (GH) could be resolved by asking whether she or he had the disease called GH deficiency (GHD). The position is no longer prevalent, as treatment is common for many children without GHD. A more recent trend attempts to resolve the issue by distinguishing {"}treatment{"} from {"}enhancement,{"} holding that enhancement is not a proper role of medicine, or at least not an entitlement. This distinction also fails because of ambiguity about the definition of the terms, and because the terms do not seem morally relevant. Many clear {"}treatments{"} are not owed to people, and many {"}enhancements{"} are widely considered to be entitlements.",
author = "N. Fost and Allen, {D. B.}",
year = "2001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
journal = "Endocrinologist",
issn = "1051-2144",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4 SUPPL.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is the treatment/enhancement distinction useful?

AU - Fost, N.

AU - Allen, D. B.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - It is appealing and common to try to resolve complex ethical dilemmas with simple definitions. Ten years ago, it was widely suggested that whether a child was entitled to treatment with growth hormone (GH) could be resolved by asking whether she or he had the disease called GH deficiency (GHD). The position is no longer prevalent, as treatment is common for many children without GHD. A more recent trend attempts to resolve the issue by distinguishing "treatment" from "enhancement," holding that enhancement is not a proper role of medicine, or at least not an entitlement. This distinction also fails because of ambiguity about the definition of the terms, and because the terms do not seem morally relevant. Many clear "treatments" are not owed to people, and many "enhancements" are widely considered to be entitlements.

AB - It is appealing and common to try to resolve complex ethical dilemmas with simple definitions. Ten years ago, it was widely suggested that whether a child was entitled to treatment with growth hormone (GH) could be resolved by asking whether she or he had the disease called GH deficiency (GHD). The position is no longer prevalent, as treatment is common for many children without GHD. A more recent trend attempts to resolve the issue by distinguishing "treatment" from "enhancement," holding that enhancement is not a proper role of medicine, or at least not an entitlement. This distinction also fails because of ambiguity about the definition of the terms, and because the terms do not seem morally relevant. Many clear "treatments" are not owed to people, and many "enhancements" are widely considered to be entitlements.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034888970&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034888970&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0034888970

VL - 11

JO - Endocrinologist

JF - Endocrinologist

SN - 1051-2144

IS - 4 SUPPL.

ER -