Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

This paper examines the ethics of distributing limited resources when demand exceeds supply. I examine two ethical theories, egalitarianism and utilitarianism, applied to an example of allocating hearts to children who have cardiac failure. I examine the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches. I argue that we must include some concern for equality of access (equal treatment for equal need). But this should occur within a context qof first evaluating the impact of a medical intervention on how long an individual will live, his or her quality of life and the probability of the intervention succeeding, I propose a third more plausible approach: 'a fair go'. I also examine whether the cost of treatment, the existence of dependants and responsibility for illness should play a part in the allocation of limited resources. Finally, I briefly discuss the role of patients and their family in making these decisions. © 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd.

Original publication




Journal article


Current Paediatrics

Publication Date





487 - 492