Andreas Albertsen
@andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
500 followers 620 following 160 posts
Associate professor, Political Science @AarhusUni and @CEPDISCresearch. Distributive justice, controversial markets, discrimination, and organ donation ethics.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
Mood: Cranking up the volume on an old Neil Young concert and writing away on a draft.
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
Link to the paper here. It is open access
link.springer.com/article/10.1...

#bioethics #discrimination #disability #disabilitydiscrimination #healthcarerationing
The Moral Justifications of Disability Discrimination in Health Care Allocation: An Experimental Assessment - Health Care Analysis
Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a mainstay of contemporary health care priority setting. However, priority setting in reference to cost-effectiveness may discriminate against people with disabilities. The ethical literature on priority setting suggests that the permissibility of such discrimination varies with the reason why people with disabilities receive lower priority. In a vignette-based survey experiment (N = 1100) in the UK, we tested whether five justifications for prioritizing people without disabilities affect the views of the broader public on priority setting based on CEA. In our vignettes, a hospital denies a person with a disability treatment for a disease based on CEA, and respondents were asked to assess the moral permissibility of this. The vignettes varied in terms of the reason the hospital emphasized in the decision. We tested vignettes emphasizing lower expected lifespan, lower quality of life, higher costs of treatment due to disability, less efficient treatment due to disability, and lower productivity due to infrequent labor-market participation. Our study is an initial exploratory survey experiment, exploring participant’s responses to CEA with respect to disability. Discrimination against the patient with a disability was deemed impermissible across all experimental conditions, and there were no significant differences between the various reasons. This suggests a discrepancy between folk intuitions and those of many ethicists.
link.springer.com
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
This contrasts with the ethical literature, where much debate turns on which reason might justify prioritizing non-disabled patients.
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
Across all scenarios, respondents judged the discrimination as impermissible.
There were no significant differences between the reasons for treatment not being cost-effective.
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
We varied why treatment for the person with a disability was less cost-effective:
– shorter expected lifespan
– lower quality of life
– higher treatment costs
– lower treatment efficiency
– reduced productivity
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
In our scenarios, a hospital denies treatment to a patient with a disability because treating them is less cost-effective. A person without the disability is treated.
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
New paper out!
Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is central to health-care priority setting. But when does it unfairly disadvantage people with disabilities? Nielsen, Hallsson, and I tested participants' views in a vignette-based survey (N = 1100, UK). 🧵#bioethics #discrimination
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
Attended the annual CEPDISC conference on discrimination on Friday. Lydia Tsiakiri did an excellent job presenting our paper on differential treatment based on vaccination status. Thanks to the organisers. Great to see new and familiar faces!
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
Thank you so much for sharing and for your great comments on the draft!!!
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
It was a lot of fun talking about ethics, organ donation and the Danish opt-out law. The interview is for the show 'Supertanker' on P1. #bioethics
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
Doing proofs for a book chapter. understood the hate for doing proofs
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
When cities exclude the homeless, it is wrongful discrimination!
In @bjpols.bsky.social Knight and I argue that hostile design (anti-sleep benches, spikes on window ledges) should be understood as discriminatory, and wrong for the same reasons as more familiar forms of discrimination.
Very proud🥳
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
Such a joy to lecture medical students at Aarhus University today on the ethics of organ donation — from opt-out systems to priority for registered donors and even payment for organs. Fantastic questions and an inspiring discussion!
#bioethics
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
The main reason Researchgate is, as the ad tells me, 'Better on the app' is that on the website I have to close the banner advertising the app #academia
Reposted by Andreas Albertsen
bjpols.bsky.social
NEW -

Anti-homeless Hostile Design as Wrongful Discrimination - cup.org/45JxUBl

- @andreasalbertsen.bsky.social & Carl Knight

#OpenAccess
BJPolS abstract discussing the wrongful aspects of hostile designs in public spaces, such as anti-homeless spikes, and the ethical implications of such designs on marginalized communities.
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
New article published in @JME_BMJ
I argue that priority rules in #organdonation may discriminate. But even if so, they’re not necessarily wrong. If wrong it’s for contingent reasons like demeaningness problematic motivations. #Bioethics #Discrimination
jme.bmj.com/content/earl...
Priority for registered organ donors: unfair discrimination against non-donors?
Priority rules give priority to registered organ donors in the allocation of organs. Such rules might directly discriminate against non-donors or indirectly discriminate against those whose religious ...
jme.bmj.com
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
Our article is online: The Moral Justifications of Disability Discrimination in Health Care Allocation: An Experimental Assessment #bioethics #xphi #experimentalphilosophy

link.springer.com/article/10.1...
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
One of the notable aspects of the REDEM projects was the creation of a database of contributions to the ethics of voting literature. #votingethics #democracy
www.redem-h2020.eu/te-ethics-vo...
REDEM - Topic Exploration
REDEM - Topic Exploration
www.redem-h2020.eu
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
Extremely proud to be serving as the third examiner on Jonas Franzen's phd thesis on Desert and Equality.
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
This model creates a new path for democratic involvement: participating in elections without voting.

It’s inclusive, practical, and especially relevant for those not ready or allowed to vote—yet still invested in democracy.
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
These are paid, voluntary roles. Not a mandatory civic duty. Not symbolic inclusion. But real, operational participation in elections.
www-tandfonline-com.ez.statsbiblioteket.dk/doi/full/10....
SimpleSAMLphp
www-tandfonline-com.ez.statsbiblioteket.dk
andreasalbertsen.bsky.social
My new article with Annabelle Lever has just been published in CRISP🥳
“A new way to serve democracy: recruiting poll workers and electoral participation”
We propose engaging non-voters—both citizens and resident non-citizens—as poll workers. #democracy #electionethics