You are hereEvents
What Should We Do When People Disagree? Priority Setting in Relation to End of Life and Cancer Drugs
There are legitimate arguments for taking account of public values in health care priority setting. One approach is to elicit preferences between different treatment provision options in the context of a limited budget, another is to explore societal viewpoints in relation to the principles or practices of priority setting, but there is little guidance on what to do when findings indicate substantial disagreement.
Drawing on a body of empirical research, and focussing specifically on work funded by the MRC Methodology Panel to investigate societal viewpoints on the subject of NHS provision of life-extending technologies for terminally ill patients, Rachel will illustrate plurality in societal perspectives and discuss implications. Assuming that ‘the public’ will almost always present a number of competing perspectives – both in terms of allegiances with different high-level principles and with respect to specific priority setting questions – how should researchers and policy makers respond?
Rachel will raise questions for future research in relation to plurality in societal values and investigating consistency, coherence and consensus.