Judicial readings of the right to health (and related rights) frequently possess something of an ‘all or nothing’ quality, exhibiting either straightforward deference to allocative choices or conceptualising the right as absolute, with consequent disruption to health systems, as witnessed in Latin America. This article seeks to identify pathways through which a normatively intermediate approach which would accord weight to rights claims without losing sight of the fact of the scarcity of health resources might be developed. It is argued that such development is most likely both to accompany and support a role for courts as institutions functioning within a society characterised by a deliberative conception of democracy.
|Number of pages||12|
|Journal||Health and Human Rights Journal|
|Publication status||Published - 22 Jun 2018|
- LAW Centre for Health Law and Society
FingerprintDive into the research topics of 'Evolving the right to health: rethinking the normative response to problems of judicialization'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.
Professor Keith J Syrett
- University of Bristol Law School - Professor of Health Law and Policy