How can we justify partiality to those near to us, such as our own families, friends, neighbours and colleagues, when we could act in much more morally valuable ways by helping others who are merely distant from us? In 1972 Peter Singer used two now-famous examples, Pond and.

In a democratic society, the social rules are imposed by all upon each. As “recipients” of the rules, we tend to think that they should be designed to engender the best attainable distribution of goods and ills or quality of life. We are inclined to assess social institutions by how they affect their participants. But there is another, oft-neglected perspective which the topic of health equity raises with special clarity: As imposers of the rules, we are inclined to think that (...) harms we inflict through the rules have greater moral weight than like harms we merely fail to prevent or to mitigate. What matters morally is not merely how we affect people, but how we treat them through the rules we impose. While current (consequentialist and Rawlsian) theorizing is dominated by the first perspective and thus supports purely recipient-oriented moral conceptions, an adequate approach to social justice requires a balancing of both. Such balancing results in a relational conception of justice, which distinguishes various ways in which an institutional scheme may causally affect the quality of life of its participants.This essay argues that the strength of our moral reason to prevent or mitigate particular medical conditions depends not only on what one might call distributional factors, such as how badly off the people affected by these conditions are in absolute and relative terms, how costly prevention or treatment would be, and how much patients would benefit from given treatment. Rather, it depends also on relational factors, that is, on how we are related to the medical conditions they suffer. It then discusses some implications of this view for understanding responsibilities for international health outcomes. (shrink)

There is currently a global shortage of nurses. Developing countries such as Malawi are among those hardest hit by this shortage. The demands on available nurses have increased and at the same time there is a lack of interest in becoming a nurse owing to the poor working conditions among those still employed in the service. It is questionable if developed nations should recruit nurses from countries such as Malawi, where severe human resource constraints are being experienced. We argue in (...) this article that the current phenomenon of nurses leaving developing nations for western countries is complex. Human rights issues of individual autonomy and public interest are at stake. (shrink)

There is currently a global shortage of nurses. Developing countries such as Malawi are among those hardest hit by this shortage. The demands on available nurses have increased and at the same time there is a lack of interest in becoming a nurse owing to the poor working conditions among those still employed in the service. It is questionable if developed nations should recruit nurses from countries such as Malawi, where severe human resource constraints are being experienced. We argue in (...) this article that the current phenomenon of nurses leaving developing nations for western countries is complex. Human rights issues of individual autonomy and public interest are at stake. (shrink)

: When health care workers migrate from poor countries to rich countries, they are exercising an important human right and helping rich countries fulfill obligations of social justice. They are also, however, creating problems of social justice in the countries they leave. Solving these problems requires balancing social needs against individual rights and studying the relationship of social justice to international justice.

Where society is viewed as an association of equal and autonomous persons, the work of caring for dependents, "love's labors", figure neither in political ...