Rawlsian contractualism and healthcare allocation: A response to TorbjÖrn tÄNNSJö

Abstract

The consideration of the problem of healthcare allocation as a special case of distributive justice is especially alluring when we only consider consequentialist theories. I articulate here an alternative Rawlsian non-consequentialist theory which prioritizes the fairness of healthcare allocation procedures rather titan directlv setting distributive parameters. The theory in question stems from Rawlsian commitments that, it is argued, have a better Rawlsian pedigree than those considered as such by Tannsjo. The alternative framework is worthv of consideration on its own merits, but it also casts light on two related difficulties with Tännsjö's approach: (i) the limits of his supposedly ecumenical methodologv, which is revealed to be dialecticallv suspect and (ii) issues with the tvpe of abstraction and idealization from actual judgements and preferences which the approach requires. © 2021 Uniwersytet Jagiellonski. All rights reserved.