Allocation of scarce healthcare resources is a hot issue. We all believe resources should be distributed justly, the trouble is no one seems quite sure what is just. Should resources be distributed according to need, according to a legal or regulatory entitlement or according to what a person has earned? And who should decide?
John Rawls offered us a thought experiment. Imagine that you and a few others were put in a room together but somehow none of you can remember your previous role in society: you can’t remember if you are a barrister or a barista, a cardiologist or a cleaner, a trust fund manager or a tramp. When the experiment is over you will return to society. Together you are charged with creating the rules that determine resource allocation within society: who will earn what, and who will get what when trouble strikes.
Rawls claims that we …