An intensive treatment program may be feasible. The issue of beneficiaries who may be incapable but who have KF-89617MedChemExpress KF-89617 unofficial arrangements with people who manage beneficiaries’ funds was raised previously (30) and addressed in an audit by the Office of the Inspector General. Altogether, 13 of the SSI/SSDI beneficiaries the OIG evaluated had people who received and managed beneficiaries’ funds, even though they had no formal role (1). There remains uncertainty as to when beneficiaries with unassigned surrogate money managers would benefit from more formal, monitored payee arrangements (30). The impact of assigning a formal representative payee largely depends on the payee assigned, with wide variability in payee practices (31). The literature suggests that representative payee programs, particularly when coordinated with other psychiatric treatment, are beneficial (16, 32, 33). Although applying standardized criteria can clearly identify the majority of beneficiaries as capable or incapable of managing finances (18, 19), in the absence of more precise guidance, capability determinations are left to clinicians’ best judgment. In addition to considering whether a beneficiary is capable, clinicians should also consider whether assignment of a representative payee would be helpful (15) and whether payee assignment is feasible.Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptConclusionThe ambiguous cases described in this paper raise fundamental questions about what financial incapability is. Examining the details of peoples’ living situations and decision making can help in making dichotomous decisions about capability in the small proportion of beneficiaries in whom an algorithm leaves unresolved questions.Supplementary MaterialRefer to Web version on PubMed Central for supplementary material.AcknowledgmentsWe would like to thank Rebecca Koenigsberg, Anna Sullivan and Monique Proto for their thoughtful comments and review of the manuscript. This research was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (R01DA025613 and R01DA12952).
J. Pers. Med. 2013, 3, 124-143; doi:10.3390/jpmOPEN ACCESSJournal of Personalized MedicineISSN 2075-4426 www.mdpi.com/journal/jpm/ Opinion”Just Caring”: Can We Afford the Ethical and Economic Costs of Circumventing Cancer Drug Resistance?Leonard M. Fleck Lixisenatide web Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences, 965 Fee Road, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-517-355-7552; Fax: +1-517-353-3289 Received: 13 May 2013; in revised form: 7 July 2013 / Accepted: 9 July 2013 / Published: 16 JulyAbstract: Personalized medicine has been presented in public and professional contexts in excessively optimistic tones. In the area of cancer what has become clear is the extraordinary heterogeneity and resilience of tumors in the face of numerous targeted therapies. This is the problem of cancer drug resistance. I summarize this problem in the first part of this essay. I then place this problem in the context of the larger political economic problem of escalating health care costs in both the EU and the US. In turn, that needs to be placed within an ethical context: How should we fairly distribute access to needed health care for an enormous range of health care needs when we have only limited resources (money) to meet virtually unlimited health care needs (cancer and everything else)? This is the problem of health care rationing. It is inescapable.An intensive treatment program may be feasible. The issue of beneficiaries who may be incapable but who have unofficial arrangements with people who manage beneficiaries’ funds was raised previously (30) and addressed in an audit by the Office of the Inspector General. Altogether, 13 of the SSI/SSDI beneficiaries the OIG evaluated had people who received and managed beneficiaries’ funds, even though they had no formal role (1). There remains uncertainty as to when beneficiaries with unassigned surrogate money managers would benefit from more formal, monitored payee arrangements (30). The impact of assigning a formal representative payee largely depends on the payee assigned, with wide variability in payee practices (31). The literature suggests that representative payee programs, particularly when coordinated with other psychiatric treatment, are beneficial (16, 32, 33). Although applying standardized criteria can clearly identify the majority of beneficiaries as capable or incapable of managing finances (18, 19), in the absence of more precise guidance, capability determinations are left to clinicians’ best judgment. In addition to considering whether a beneficiary is capable, clinicians should also consider whether assignment of a representative payee would be helpful (15) and whether payee assignment is feasible.Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptConclusionThe ambiguous cases described in this paper raise fundamental questions about what financial incapability is. Examining the details of peoples’ living situations and decision making can help in making dichotomous decisions about capability in the small proportion of beneficiaries in whom an algorithm leaves unresolved questions.Supplementary MaterialRefer to Web version on PubMed Central for supplementary material.AcknowledgmentsWe would like to thank Rebecca Koenigsberg, Anna Sullivan and Monique Proto for their thoughtful comments and review of the manuscript. This research was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (R01DA025613 and R01DA12952).
J. Pers. Med. 2013, 3, 124-143; doi:10.3390/jpmOPEN ACCESSJournal of Personalized MedicineISSN 2075-4426 www.mdpi.com/journal/jpm/ Opinion”Just Caring”: Can We Afford the Ethical and Economic Costs of Circumventing Cancer Drug Resistance?Leonard M. Fleck Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences, 965 Fee Road, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-517-355-7552; Fax: +1-517-353-3289 Received: 13 May 2013; in revised form: 7 July 2013 / Accepted: 9 July 2013 / Published: 16 JulyAbstract: Personalized medicine has been presented in public and professional contexts in excessively optimistic tones. In the area of cancer what has become clear is the extraordinary heterogeneity and resilience of tumors in the face of numerous targeted therapies. This is the problem of cancer drug resistance. I summarize this problem in the first part of this essay. I then place this problem in the context of the larger political economic problem of escalating health care costs in both the EU and the US. In turn, that needs to be placed within an ethical context: How should we fairly distribute access to needed health care for an enormous range of health care needs when we have only limited resources (money) to meet virtually unlimited health care needs (cancer and everything else)? This is the problem of health care rationing. It is inescapable.