Related Experiment Videos
More on regulation: a reply to Stephen Weiner
American Journal of Law & Medicine
|January 1, 1978
Summary
Health care cost-containment regulation involves rationing resources. Professor Havighurst argues for consumer choice and market competition over regulation, while Weiner defends regulation
Area of Science:
- Health economics
- Public policy
- Healthcare management
Background:
- Professor Havighurst's prior work proposed market-based solutions for health care cost containment, viewing regulation as rationing.
- Stephen M. Weiner criticized Havighurst's approach, emphasizing the political nature of regulation and its necessity in healthcare.
Purpose of the Study:
- To respond to Stephen M. Weiner's critique of health care regulation and market-based approaches.
- To clarify Professor Havighurst's stance on health care regulation, rationing, planning, and competition.
- To address the debate on the volume and direction of health care regulation.
Main Methods:
- Critical commentary and discourse analysis.
- Reiteration and defense of previously published arguments on health care economics and policy.
- Analysis of opposing viewpoints regarding the role of regulation versus market forces in healthcare.
Main Results:
- Professor Havighurst asserts Weiner misrepresented his views on regulation and its political dimensions.
- Havighurst maintains his critiques of regulation have been constructive and considers the political aspects extensively.
- Havighurst suggests Weiner's critique may stem from a bias against individual choice and market mechanisms.
Conclusions:
- The debate highlights fundamental disagreements on the role of regulation versus market choice in health care.
- Havighurst defends his position, emphasizing the importance of individual choice and market principles in healthcare.
- The commentary underscores the ongoing discussion regarding the optimal balance between regulation and competition in healthcare systems.