Providing justice in healthcare to is an integral right for children of all ages. Fairness as seen in healthcare provision is based on the fact that every individual is granted equal treatment in healthcare settings ( Beracochea, 2015) . Many factors ought to be considered while ensuring justice in the healthcare system especially with regard to neonates.
The neonatal unit’s threat of budgetary cut puts the unit in a tight position where a choice has to be made on whether to accept the budget cut or implement a policy where children with less than seven hundred and fifty grams are not treated. In my opinion, the former policy that would see the neonatal unit accept budgetary cuts would be my policy choice. Making such a decision requires extensive consultation with considerable attention given to justice in the healthcare system ( Beracochea, 2015) .
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
According to Johnson, Schwartz, Gatter, and Pendo, (2016) , the public health ethics would largely shape the determination of policy. Public health ethics encompass preventive medicine as well as health promotion. Johnson et al., (2016) posits that while reviewing preventive medicine, several measures that range from vaccination as well as screening for diseases with an objective of controlling or preventing disease spread. Despite the fact that accepting a budget cut will influence the ability of the neonatal unit to offer control and prevention of disease, the policy will provide the health professionals with an opportunity to offer services to neonates who have higher chances of survival even if they weigh less than seven hundred and fifty grams.
Continuous research by Johnson et al., (2016) indicates that health promotion stands out as an integral part of the medical field. Subsequently, adopting a policy requiring that children under seven hundred and fifty grams be exempted from accessing healthcare while in the neonatal unit can be viewed as a coercive approach. Therefore, implementing such a policy will coerce health professionals in the neonatal unit to segregate neonates with less than seven hundred and fifty grams even when they deserve care with chances of pulling through.
Interventions in healthcare allocations are unavoidable as shown by the inverse care law. As the law posits there exists a dilemma on the basis of resources allocation to the neonatal unit necessitating relatively harsh choices to be made ( Purtilo & Doherty, 2016) . The question that arises as a result of the resource allocation dilemma is the criteria used to achieve maximum care. In a case like this where the neonatal unit has to make a choice, the budgetary cut path may be better to trend on than rationing health. It can be concluded that being a neonate with more than seven hundred and fifty grams does not give certain proportion of neonates deserving care more right to life than others. The possibility of the above seven hundred and fifty grams neonates may be at a better position of surviving but it would not be fair that the adopted policy gives them advantage over others.
Distributive justice
I peg my decision on the appropriate policy on distributive justice given that a balance has to be struck on how to fairly ration the scarce available resources. Distributive justice in this scenario refers to a moral obligation where fair adjudication has to be taken between competing needs ( Purtilo & Doherty, 2016) . Every baby in the neonatal unit is entitled to a fair share of scarce resources. Distributive justice lays a strong emphasis on more than just equality in that some babies in the neonatal unit may be treated unjustly despite being accorded equal treatment. Subsequently, deciding on the budgetary cut rather than treating the above seven hundred and fifty grams babies may prove a fair and sensible way of distributing the scarce resources within the unit.
Supportive principles
Several principles stand out as supporting the concept of distributive justice within the neonatal unit. First, studies by Fourie and Rid, (2017)opines that there arises a need to offer an equal share of the scarce resources to all babies within the unit mainly advised by the fact that trending that path does not give any of the babies advantage over the others but rather all are viewed from the same point of view. Additionally, just healthcare demands that care is given according to needs as Fourie and Rid, (2017) further asserts . As such, the babies in the neonatal unit will be given attention and care according to their status of health to increase their chances of surviving. Moreover, each of the babies has an equal potential for future life years thus negating any possible thoughts of according unequal treatment based on age. The principle of offering healthcare according to what each individual deserves provides another backing for the adopted policy.
References
In Beracochea, E. (2015). Improving aid effectiveness in global health .
In Fourie, C., & In Rid, A. (2017). What is enough?: Sufficiency, justice, and health .
Johnson, S. H., Schwartz, R. L., Gatter, R., & Pendo, E. (2016). Bioethics and law in a nutshell .
Purtilo, R. B., & Doherty, R. F. (2016). Ethical dimensions in the health professions .
