Food and Drug Administration

Food and Drug Administration

Clinical trials are a means through which the healthcare industry tests a new drug, treatment, or medical device. The traditional methodology behind clinical trials consists of various phases in which the emerging product undergoes a series of intense tests, most of which tend to occur on interested and/or compliant patients. The U.S. government has an established network for tackling the emergence of new products in the healthcare industry. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) typically conducts appropriate trials on new drugs coming from pharmaceutical companies.[20] Along with the FDA, the National Institutes of Health sets the guidelines for all kinds of clinical trials relating to infectious diseases. For cancer, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsors a series or cooperative groups like CALGB and COG in order to standardize protocols for cancer treatment.

The primary purpose of quality assurance (QA) in healthcare is to ensure that the quality of patient care is in accordance with established guidelines. The government usually plays a significant role in providing structured guidance for treating a particular disease or ailment. However, protocols for treatment can also be worked out at individual healthcare institutions like hospitals and HMOs. In some cases, quality assurance is seen as a superfluous endeavor, as many healthcare-based QA organizations, like QARC, are publicly funded at the hands of taxpayers.[22] However, many people would agree that healthcare quality assurance, particularly in the areas cancer treatment and disease control are necessary components to the vitality of any legitimate healthcare system. With respect to quality assurance in cancer treatment scenarios, the Quality Assurance Review Center (QARC) is just one example of a QA facility that seeks "to improve the standards of care" for patients "by improving the quality of clinical trials medicine."

Everybody who wishes to have a child wants it to be perfect (at least at birth). Nobody wants and/or wishes for their child to be born with Down Syndrome or Cerebral Palsy. In fact, obstetricians have the most medical malpractice lawsuits filed against them. As a result, they have to pay the highest premiums for malpractice insurance. These high costs inevitably become a hindrance not only to the doctors, but also to the healthcare industry as a whole. And although patients and their families have the right to appeal and confront a physician regarding the quality of treatment received, there must be a limit as to how far they can go. Frivolous lawsuits are clearly becoming a major problem for healthcare providers.

The ecophilosophy of Garrett Hardin constitutes one perspective from which to view the reproductive rights of human beings. For the most part, Hardin argues that it is immoral to have large families, especially since it does a disservice to society in the sense that there is only a finite number of resources in the world. In an essay entitled The Tragedy of the Commons, Hardin states,

To couple the concept of freedom to breed with the belief that everyone born has an equal right to the commons is to lock the world into a tragic course of action.

This statement essentially summarizes Hardin's major point concerning the negligible right of all human beings to procreate. Moreover, Hardin is a vocal critic of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which states that "any choice and decision with regard to the size of the family must irrevocably rest with the family itself, and cannot be made by anyone else."

As for healthcare philosophy, Hardin's ecophilosophical views may seem like a stretch. Nevertheless, they are important to keep in mind, especially when considering the call for healthcare as a universal birth right of all people. The increasing strains placed on healthcare systems are primarily the result of a growing human population. One way of mitigating healthcare costs is to moderate population growth. The fewer people there are to take care of, the less expensive healthcare will become. And to apply this logic to what medical ethicist Leonard J. Weber previously suggested, less expensive healthcare does not necessarily mean poorer quality healthcare.