Andreas Albertsen
Aarhus University, Aarhus School of Business and Social Science, Department Member
- Health Inequalities, Luck Egalitarianism, Distributive Justice, Health Care Ethics, Health Care Policy, Public Health Ethics, and 34 morePublic Health, Ethics, Applied Ethics, Eric Rakowski, Bioethics, Philosophy of Medicine, John Rawls, Equality, Political Science, Health Law, Ronald Dworkin, Oral health, Robert Nozick, Egalitarian distributive justice, G.A.Cohen, Equality of opportunity, Personal Responsibility, Lige Muligheder, Social Inequality, G. A. Cohen, Retfærdighed, Lighed, Politisk Filosofi, Eli Feiring, Social Justice, Political Philosophy, Organ Donation and Transplantation, Applied Philosophy, Social Determinants of Health, Egalitarianism, Inequality, Justice, Voting Advice Applications (VAAs), and Organ Donation, Presumed Consent, Ethicsedit
- Works on: 'Voting Matters' especially the effect and ethics of Voting Advice Applications; - 'Organ shortage', the p... moreWorks on: 'Voting Matters' especially the effect and ethics of Voting Advice Applications; - 'Organ shortage', the proper role of states, markets and families in ending the organ shortage; - 'Distributive Justice', especially personal responsibility and health.edit
This is the accepted manuscript (post-print version) of the article. Contentwise, the post-print version is identical to the final published version, but there may be differences in typography and layout. The published version can be... more
This is the accepted manuscript (post-print version) of the article. Contentwise, the post-print version is identical to the final published version, but there may be differences in typography and layout. The published version can be found here.
Research Interests:
The work of prominent analytical Marxist, G.A. Cohen, offers a vision of socialism with distributive justice and community at its core. While Cohen's views on distributive justice have been hugely influential, much less has been said... more
The work of prominent analytical Marxist, G.A. Cohen, offers a vision of socialism with distributive justice and community at its core. While Cohen's views on distributive justice have been hugely influential, much less has been said about community. This article argues that community plays three distinct roles in Cohen's socialism. One is as an independent value, the second is as a necessary adjacent counterpart to justice, which serves both to restrict and facilitate distributive equality, and the third is as a critique of the liberal contractualist view of humanity. We argue that these are distinct and valuable elements in Cohen's thought, and each must be recognized to understand the range and implications of Cohen's socialism.
Research Interests:
This is the accepted manuscript (post-print version) of the article. Contentwise, the post-print version is identical to the final published version, but there may be differences in typography and layout. Please refer to the published... more
This is the accepted manuscript (post-print version) of the article. Contentwise, the post-print version is identical to the final published version, but there may be differences in typography and layout. Please refer to the published version. Albertsen, A. Covid-19 and age discrimination: benefit maximization, fairness, and justified age-based rationing.
Research Interests:
Should priority in the allocation of organs be given to those who have previously donated or declared their willingness to do so? This article examines the Israeli priority rule in light of two prominent critiques of priority rules,... more
Should priority in the allocation of organs be given to those who have previously donated or declared their willingness to do so? This article examines the Israeli priority rule in light of two prominent critiques of priority rules, pertaining to failure to reciprocate and unfairness. The scope and content of these critiques are interpreted from the perspective of equality of opportunity. As the Israeli priority rule may reasonably be criticized for unfairness and failing to reward certain behaviors, the article develops an adjusted priority rule, which removes and adjust the elements in the Israeli priority rule deemed problematic. However, such a priority rule is complex to the extent that it may fail to increase donation rates and furthermore introduce new concerns of fairness, as the better off may be better able to navigate the complex adjusted priority rule.
Research Interests:
A comprehensive understanding of the ethics of the Covid-19 pandemic priorities must be sensitive to the influence of social inequality. We distinguish between ex-ante and ex-post relevance of social inequality for Covid-19 disadvantage.... more
A comprehensive understanding of the ethics of the Covid-19 pandemic priorities must be sensitive to the influence of social inequality. We distinguish between ex-ante and ex-post relevance of social inequality for Covid-19 disadvantage. Ex-ante relevance refers to the distribution of risks of exposure. Ex-post relevance refers to effect of inequality on how patients respond to infection. In the case of Covid-19, both ex-ante and ex-post effects suggest a distribution which is sensitive to the prevalence social inequality. On this basis, we provide a generic fairness argument for the claim that welfare states ought to favour a healthcare priority scheme that gives particular weight to protecting the socially disadvantaged.
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Applied Ethics, Health Behavior, Health Care, Health Inequalities, Egalitarianism, and 15 moreMedical Ethics, Health Care Ethics, Medicine, Healthcare, Egalitarian distributive justice, Humans, Inequality, Moral Responsibility, Chronic Disease, Luck Egalitarianism, Luck, Individual Responsibility, Journal of Medical Ethics, Andreas Albertsen, and Eli Feiring
For many, receiving an organ transplantation is the only viable way to prolong their lives and increase their quality of life. However, the demand for organs exceeds supply. Are there efficient and ethically acceptable ways of increasing... more
For many, receiving an organ transplantation is the only viable way to prolong their lives and increase their quality of life. However, the demand for organs exceeds supply. Are there efficient and ethically acceptable ways of increasing the number of organ donors? Recently, nudging has been proposed as an attractive policy instrument. Nudging eschews coercing people. It affects instead the choice architecture within which people make their choices. Still, autonomy concerns arise. Accordingly, we have to make a difficult trade-off between augmenting people’s welfare, on the one hand, and respecting their autonomy on the other. An opt-out system in which people count as donors unless they state otherwise is, however, likely to increase donations considerably, and to do so at acceptable costs in terms of infringements on autonomy.
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Humanities and Politica
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Nursing, Applied Ethics, Bioethics, Pain, Health Care, and 15 morePalliative Care, Economic Justice, Egalitarianism, Medical Ethics, Distributive Justice, John Rawls, Medicine, Pain Management, Clinical Decision Making, Humans, Health Care Rationing, Patient Rights, Charities, Patient Advocacy, and Choice Behavior
Research Interests: Sociology, Political Theory, Health Care, Political Science, Health Inequalities, and 12 moreEgalitarianism, Distributive Justice, Health Justice, Public Health, Health Policy, Personal Responsibility, Oral health, Moral Responsibility, Luck Egalitarianism, Luck, Personal and Social Responsibility, and positive economics
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Computer Science, Economics, Political Science, Egalitarianism, Distributive Justice, and 15 moreVulnerability, Deservingness, Ronald Dworkin, Liberal Egalitarianism, Disadvantage, Luck Egalitarianism, Luck, Richard Arneson, Larry Temkin, Elizabeth Anderson, Disadvantaged, Relational Egalitarianism, costly rescues, morally good choices, and Vulnerable Caretaker
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Political Philosophy, Ethics, Applied Ethics, Health Care, Medical Ethics, and 11 moreResource Allocation, Distributive Justice, Medicine, Healthcare, Intergenerational justice, Obligations to Future Generations, Priority setting in healthcare, Luck Egalitarianism, Health Care Rationing, Luck, and Sustainability
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Sociology, Social Psychology, Philosophy, Applied Ethics, Philosophy of Medicine, and 15 moreEgalitarianism, Medicine, Social Responsibility, Humans, Oral health, Attribution, Cost Sharing, Taxes, Waiting lists, Health Care Rationing, Luck, Bioethical Issues, Choice Behavior, Personal autonomy, and positive economics
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Book review of Solveig Lena Hansen and Silke Schicktanz (eds): Ethical Challenges of Organ Transplantation: Current Debates and International Perspectives
Research Interests:
Hassoun argues that the poor in the world have a right to health and that the Global Health Impact Index (GHI) provides consumers in well-off countries with the opportunity to ensure that more people have access to essential medicines.... more
Hassoun argues that the poor in the world have a right to health and that the Global Health Impact Index (GHI) provides consumers in well-off countries with the opportunity to ensure that more people have access to essential medicines. Because of this, consumers would be ethically obliged to purchase GHI labeled products in the face of existing global inequalities. In presenting her argument, Hassoun rejects the so-called democratic account of ethical consumption in favour of the positive change account. Two versions of the democratic change account are relevant. One underscores the importance of democratic procedures and institutions, while the other stresses our fundamental moral equality. While at least one prominent institutionalist account has problems, revised versions would be less vulnerable to Hassoun's counterexamples. Furthermore, institutionalist accounts come with the epistemological gains from democratic procedures and deliberations, which may be especially important under uncertainty. Finally, and perhaps more challenging for the Global Health Impact index project, this measure may place the burden unfairly on those who need to buy medicines. This is a pivotal insight from the non-institutionalist version of the democratic account of ethical consumption.
Research Interests:
The discussion on mandatory turnout, which controversially introduces coercion at the heart of the electoral process, illustrates a dilemma between increasing voter turnout on the one hand and avoiding coercion on the other. If... more
The discussion on mandatory turnout, which controversially introduces coercion at the heart of the electoral process, illustrates a dilemma between increasing voter turnout on the one hand and avoiding coercion on the other. If successful, a recent proposal by Elliott solves this dilemma as it removes the compulsory element of mandatory turnout. Specifically, Elliot reinterprets the policy’s purpose as (a) a pre-commitment device for those who believe that they have a duty to vote and (b) a nudge to the surveillance of politics for those who do not believe this. We critically evaluate Elliott’s novel intervention in the debate and argue that it is ultimately unsuccessful. Mandatory turnout can be interpreted as neither a pre-commitment device nor a nudge. Moreover, we present a more promising and novel solution to the dilemma: a genuine state-administered pre-commitment device with respect to voting that also nudges citizens to vote and seems prima facie attractive.
Research Interests:
Should we let personal responsibility for health-related behavior influence the allocation of healthcare resources? In this paper, we clarify what it means to be responsible for an action. We rely on a crucial conceptual distinction... more
Should we let personal responsibility for health-related behavior influence the allocation of healthcare resources? In this paper, we clarify what it means to be responsible for an action. We rely on a crucial conceptual distinction between being responsible and holding someone responsible, and show that even though we might be considered responsible and blameworthy for our health-related actions, there could still be well-justified reasons for not considering it reasonable to hold us responsible by giving us lower priority. We transform these philosophical considerations into analytical use first by assessing the general features of health-related actions and the corresponding healthcare needs. Then, we identify clusters of structural features that even adversely affected people cannot reasonably deny constitute actions for which they should be held responsible. We summarize the results in an analytical framework that can be used by decision-makers when considering personal respons...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
A comprehensive understanding of the ethics of the COVID-19 pandemic priorities must be sensitive to the influence of social inequality. We distinguish between ex-ante and ex-post relevance of social inequality for COVID-19 disadvantage.... more
A comprehensive understanding of the ethics of the COVID-19 pandemic priorities must be sensitive to the influence of social inequality. We distinguish between ex-ante and ex-post relevance of social inequality for COVID-19 disadvantage. Ex-ante relevance refers to the distribution of risks of exposure. Ex-post relevance refers to the effect of inequality on how patients respond to infection. In the case of COVID-19, both ex-ante and ex-post effects suggest a distribution which is sensitive to the prevalence social inequality. On this basis, we provide a generic fairness argument for the claim that welfare states ought to favour a healthcare priority scheme that gives particular weight to protecting the socially disadvantaged.
Research Interests:
Organtransplantation redder liv og forøger livskvalitet. Der er imidlertid alt for få organer til rådighed. Der er for få donorer. Hvad kan vi gøre for at få flere donorer? Et nyere løsningsforslag er at nudge eller ”puffe” folk til at... more
Organtransplantation redder liv og forøger livskvalitet. Der er imidlertid alt for få organer til rådighed. Der er for få donorer. Hvad kan vi gøre for at få flere donorer? Et nyere løsningsforslag er at nudge eller ”puffe” folk til at træffe en beslutning. En vigtig fordel ved puffepolitikker er, at den ønskede adfærdsændring frembringes uden anvendelse af tvang. Imidlertid er politikkerne ikke uproblematiske. Selvom de ikke begrænser vores valgfrihed, kan de hævdes at krænke vores selvbestemmelsesret. De rejser altså et klassisk dilemma mellem et hensyn til borgernes velfærd (i dette tilfælde folk på venteliste til en organdonation) og borgernes selvbestemmelsesret (i dette tilfælde til selv at bestemme, hvad der skal ske med deres organer efter deres død). En politik, hvor borgerne som udgangspunkt står som organdonorer, kan dog retfærdiggøres. Den vil alt andet lige fremme udbuddet af organer væsentligt, og i lyset heraf er dens delvise krænkelse af folks ret til selvbestemmelse...
Research Interests: Humanities and Politica
Chapter on organ markets from The Rowman & Littlefield Handbook of Bioethics
EDITED BY EZIO DI NUCCI; JI-YOUNG LEE AND ISAAC A. WAGNER
EDITED BY EZIO DI NUCCI; JI-YOUNG LEE AND ISAAC A. WAGNER
Research Interests:
Rare diseases pose a particular priority setting problem. The UK gives rare diseases special priority in healthcare priority setting. Effectively, the National Health Service is willing to pay much more to gain a quality-adjusted... more
Rare diseases pose a particular priority setting problem. The UK gives rare diseases special priority in healthcare priority setting. Effectively, the National Health Service is willing to pay much more to gain a quality-adjusted life-year related to a very rare disease than one related to a more common condition. But should rare diseases receive priority in the allocation of scarce healthcare resources? This article develops and evaluates four arguments in favour of such a priority. These pertain to public values, luck egalitarian distributive justice the epistemic difficulties of obtaining knowledge about rare diseases and the incentives created by a higher willingness to pay. The first is at odds with our knowledge regarding popular opinion. The three other arguments may provide a reason to fund rare diseases generously. However, they are either overinclusive because they would also justify funding for many non-rare diseases or underinclusive in the sense of justifying priority f...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
While Covid-19 vaccines provide a light at the end of the tunnel in a difficult time, they also bring forth the complex ethical issue of global vaccine distribution. The current unequal global distribution of vaccines is unjust towards... more
While Covid-19 vaccines provide a light at the end of the tunnel in a difficult time, they also bring forth the complex ethical issue of global vaccine distribution. The current unequal global distribution of vaccines is unjust towards the vulnerable living in lowincome countries. A vaccine tax should be introduced to remedy this. Under such a scheme, a small fraction of the money spent by a country on vaccines for its own population would go into a fund, such as COVAX, dedicated to buying vaccines and distributing them to the world's poorest. A vaccine tax would provide a much-needed injection of funds to remedy the unequal distribution of vaccines. The tax allows for a distribution that, to a lesser degree, reflects the ability to pay and is superior to a donation-based model because it minimizes the opportunity for freeriding.
Research Interests:
Rare diseases pose a particular priority-setting problem. The United Kingdom gives rare diseases special priority in healthcare priority-setting. Effectively, the NHS is willing to pay much more to gain a Quality-Adjusted Life year... more
Rare diseases pose a particular priority-setting problem. The United Kingdom gives rare diseases special priority in healthcare priority-setting. Effectively, the NHS is willing to pay much more to gain a Quality-Adjusted Life year related to a very rare disease than one related to a more common condition. But should rare diseases receive priority in the allocation of scarce healthcare resources? This article develops and evaluates four arguments in favor of such a priority. These pertain to public values, luck egalitarian distributive justice, the epistemic difficulties of obtaining knowledge about rare diseases, and the incentives created by a higher willingness to pay. The first is at odds with our knowledge regarding popular opinion. The three other arguments may provide a reason to fund rare diseases generously. However, they are either over-inclusive because they would also justify funding for many non-rare diseases or under-inclusive in the sense of justifying priority for only some rare diseases. The arguments thus fail to provide a justification that tracks rareness as such.
Research Interests:
Hassoun argues that the poor in the world have a right to health and that the Global Health Impact Index provides consumers in well-off countries with the opportunity to ensure that more people have access to essential medicines. Because... more
Hassoun argues that the poor in the world have a right to health and that the Global Health Impact Index provides consumers in well-off countries with the opportunity to ensure that more people have access to essential medicines. Because of this, these consumers would be ethically obliged to purchase Global Health Impact Index-labeled products in the face of existing global inequalities. In presenting her argument, Hassoun rejects the so-called democratic account of ethical consumption in favor of the positive change account. Two versions of the democratic change account are relevant. One underscores the importance of democratic procedures and institutions, while the other stresses our fundamental moral equality. While at least one prominent institutionalist account has problems, revised versions would be less vulnerable to Hassoun’s counterexamples. Furthermore, institutionalist accounts come with the epistemological gains from democratic procedures and deliberations, which may be ...
Research Interests:
Under mandated choice policies, people are free to choose whichever option they prefer, but “choosing not to choose” is penalized. In Australia, voting is mandatory, and abstaining is penalized with a fine. In New Zealand and several... more
Under mandated choice policies, people are free to choose whichever option they prefer, but “choosing not to choose” is penalized. In Australia, voting is mandatory, and abstaining is penalized with a fine. In New Zealand and several American states, it is mandatory for those who want to obtain a driver’s license that they decide whether to register as organ donors. If they fail to do so, they will not receive a driver’s license. Proponents of such policies stress that they may be the least autonomy-infringing ways of achieving some good and provide society with knowledge about people’s preferences and are, partly for these reasons, preferable to employing defaults. This article compares mandated choice in voting and donor registration with respect to the ends served, how a mandated choice policy will serve these ends, the distribution of burdens, and the nature of the possible options. It is argued that mandated choice is more attractive in the context of donor registration.
Research Interests:
In the effort to address the persistent organ shortage it is sometimes suggested that we should incentivize people to sign up as organ donors. One way of doing so is to give priority in the allocation of organs to those who are themselves... more
In the effort to address the persistent organ shortage it is sometimes suggested that we should incentivize people to sign up as organ donors. One way of doing so is to give priority in the allocation of organs to those who are themselves registered as donors. Israel introduced such a scheme recently and the preliminary reports indicate increased donation rates. How should we evaluate such initiatives from an ethical perspective? Luck egalitarianism, a responsibility-sensitive approach to distributive justice, provides one possible justification: Those who decide against being organ donors limit the health care resources available to others. As such, a priority rule can be justified by a luck egalitarian approach to distributive justice. Furthermore, a priority rule inspired by luck egalitarianism is well equipped to avoid prominent criticisms of such a procurement system. Luck egalitarianism provides us with reaons to exempt people who are not responsible for their inability to don...
Research Interests:
Unequal and declining electoral turnout has spurred numerous initiatives to reverse the trend. Voting advice applications (VAAs) are one prominent attempt. VAAs match the opinions of voters with th...
Research Interests:
In the final parts of Piketty’s Capital and Ideology, he presents his vision for a just and more equal society. This vision marks an alternative to contemporary societies, and differs radically both from the planned Soviet economies and... more
In the final parts of Piketty’s Capital and Ideology, he presents his vision for a just and more equal society. This vision marks an alternative to contemporary societies, and differs radically both from the planned Soviet economies and from social democratic welfare states. In his sketch of this vision, Piketty provides a principled account of how such a society would look and how it would modify the current status of private property through co-managed enterprises and the creation of temporary ownership models. He also sets out two principles for when inequalities are just. The first principle permits inequalities that are beneficial to the worst-off, while the second permits inequalities that reflect differences in people’s choices and ambitions. This article identifies a tension between Piketty’s two inequality-permitting principles. It also argues that the procedural limits on how decisions are made within the enterprises of participatory socialism might create inequalities not...
Research Interests:
Many consider inequality in health unfair if it is caused by inequality within the healthcare system but less unfair when caused by individuals’ health behaviour. However, healthcare systems are challenged when it comes to ensuring equal... more
Many consider inequality in health unfair if it is caused by inequality within the healthcare system but less unfair when caused by individuals’ health behaviour. However, healthcare systems are challenged when it comes to ensuring equal care for equal need. In Roemer’s equality of opportunity theory, people have equal opportunity for obtaining something if obtaining it reflects their effort instead of their circumstances. Very little is known about how responsibility exerted by patients prior to illness affects the healthcare they are provided by the healthcare system. We aimed to apply Roemer’s theory to an acute care setting where healthcare is most directly in the hands of the healthcare system in order to study the role of patient-exerted responsibility for their opportunities in the healthcare system. We operationalised the responsibility patients exert as Body Mass Index (BMI), smoking and alcohol habits, and their circumstances as demographics, socioeconomics, prognostic fac...
Research Interests:
A presentation on parts of a recent ongoing research project
Research Interests:
Inden for den politiske filosofi har spørgsmålet om fordelingsmaessig retfaerdighed nydt betydelige interesse i de senere år. Ofte fremhaeves liberale bidrag som de, der er leveret af John Rawls og Ronald Dworkin, eller libertaere... more
Inden for den politiske filosofi har spørgsmålet om fordelingsmaessig retfaerdighed nydt betydelige interesse i de senere år. Ofte fremhaeves liberale bidrag som de, der er leveret af John Rawls og Ronald Dworkin, eller libertaere positioner som den Robert Nozick stod for. I ethvert vaerk der forholder sig til disse tre hovednavne i litteraturen vil ét navn gå igen som en central fortolker og kritikker af dem alle: G.A. Cohen. Vrousalis' bog The Political Philosophy of G.A. Cohen – Back to Socialists Basics er det første forsøg på at give en samlet fremstilling af Cohens politiske filosofi.
Research Interests:
Equality of opportunity, once a rather peripheral idea in debates over distributive justice, is receiving increased attention. In his recent book, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equality of Opportunity, Joseph Fishkin takes on the task of... more
Equality of opportunity, once a rather peripheral idea in debates over distributive justice, is receiving increased attention. In his recent book, Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equality of Opportunity, Joseph Fishkin takes on the task of proposing 'a new way of thinking about equal opportunity and about the myriad of questions in law, public policy, and institutional design that center on notions of equal opportunity' (1). For two reasons this is a quite ambitious task. One is that the literature on equal opportunity is now vast, which makes it hard to flesh out a novel contribution and relate it to existing positions. The other is that the idea of equality of opportunity seems relevant in so many different and diverse areas that discussing specific applications will almost always result in important areas being left out or not given sufficient attention. However, in pursuing his aim, Fishkin delivers an interesting account. Fishkin states that opportunities are important because of what they enable us to do and become, and because the opportunities open to us shape who we are (2, 3). He voices a number of reservations regarding how the literature usually engages with the idea of equality of opportunity. Importantly, he stresses that we tend to discuss equality of opportunities as ex ante structures, and tend to consider the ideal fulfilled once people have equal opportunities from birth (or upon entering adulthood) (7). According to Fishkin such reasoning fails to acknowledge the importance of opportunities available to people 'along the way, including for those who have, for one reason or another, failed to jump through important hoops at particular ages' (7). Caring for people's ability to shape their own lives should also
Research Interests:
The idea of equality of opportunity (EOP) has come to some prominence in recent years. Segall notes at first that EOP was not always this fashionable.
Research Interests:
English intro: In 2020 I published a book on organ donation. It is published by Aarhus University Press. The book is in Danish and the website for the book can be found here: The book explores alternatives to the current danish opt-in... more
English intro: In 2020 I published a book on organ donation. It is published by Aarhus University Press. The book is in Danish and the website for the book can be found here: The book explores alternatives to the current danish opt-in model for organ donation. Specifically, it discusses the ethical permissibility of opt-out, mandated choice and priority rules. A chapter is dedicated to the role of the family and rejects the so-called family veto. The book recommends a change to an opt-out system, arguing that it is a) likely to bring about more organs for transplantation and b) consistent with proper respect for autonomy. If you have any questions about the book please write me on aba@ps.au.dk