عناصر مشابهة
Partisanship vis-à-vis Public Health Ethics: Economic and Religious Controversies of the Affordable Care Act as a Case Study
| المصدر: | مجلة الناقد للدراسات السياسية |
|---|---|
| الناشر: |
جامعة محمد خيضر بسكرة - كلية الحقوق والعلوم السياسية - مخبر أثر الاجتهاد القضائي على حركة التشريع
|
| المؤلف الرئيسي: | |
| المجلد/العدد: | مج5, ع2 |
| محكمة: | نعم |
| الدولة: | الجزائر |
| التاريخ الميلادي: | 2021 |
| الصفحات: | 628 - 646 |
| DOI: | 10.37136/1999-005-002-033 |
| ISSN: | 2602-5779 |
| رقم MD: | 1231179 |
| نوع المحتوى: | بحوث ومقالات |
| اللغة: | English |
| قواعد المعلومات: | EcoLink |
| مواضيع: | |
| رابط المحتوى: |
|
| المستخلص: | From its inception, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as "Obamacare," encountered several obstacles in its implementation. The difficulties included the severe economically framed debate and the religious controversy. While the left-wing advocates sought a universal health care model, conservatives argued that delivering assistance must be selective, accurate, and limited to be efficient. The current research offers valuable ideological insights into a long-lasting American health system beset by partisanship. This conceptual, qualitative paper employs a case study as a research tool to trace the ethical considerations behind the liberal-conservative debates over the ACA's socio-economic measures. It attempts to evaluate the American political division by considering both the ideological and ethical perspectives of the matter. Through applying the Lakoffian "Metaphor Theory" and essential principles of public health ethics included in "Principlism," the study concludes that the ACA's implementation demonstrates conformity with two relevant theories concerned with political partisanship and public health ethics, respectively. |
|---|
