PropertyValue
?:abstract
  • When the COVID-19 pandemic reached the United States in spring 2020, many states and hospitals announced crisis standards of care (CSC) plans that used age as a categorical exclusion criterion. Such age-choosing was quickly flagged as discriminatory, and so some states and hospitals shifted to embedding age as a tiebreaker deeper in their plans. Different rationales were given for using age as a tiebreaker: (1) that younger patients were more likely to survive than older patients, (2) that saving younger patients would save more life-years, (3) that younger patients deserved a chance to live through life\'s stages. We provide a critical analysis of these three rationales, noting the differences between them, and then questioning the ethical and legal justifications for such age-choosing.
is ?:annotates of
?:creator
?:journal
  • Hastings_Cent._rep
?:license
  • unk
?:publication_isRelatedTo_Disease
?:source
  • WHO
?:title
  • When Is Age Choosing Ageist Discrimination?
?:type
?:who_covidence_id
  • #976972
?:year
  • 2020

Metadata

Anon_0  
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://purl.org/net/provenance/ns#DataItem>
<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> <http://www.w3.org/2004/03/trix/rdfg-1/Graph>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/entity/wpr74ekb>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/topic> Anon_0
<http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/cp/owl/informationrealization.owl#realizes> <https://research.tib.eu/covid-19/data/entity/wpr74ekb>
<http://purl.org/net/provenance/ns#createdBy>
Anon_1   (more)
expand all