_Etter revisjonen av bioteknologiloven i mai 2020, ble eggdonasjon på norsk et faktum. I kjølvannet av «bioteknologiforliket» – en koalisjon mellom Ap, Frp og SV som sikret stortingsflertall for endringene i loven – skulle kompensasjonsstørrelsen fastsettes for kvinner som ønsker å donere bort egg. Det ble av den grunn holdt en høring om retningslinjene for donasjon av egg, herunder alternativer for hvor mye donor bør kompenseres økonomisk. I denne artikkelen har jeg analysert høringsutkastet, høringssvarene og de endelige retningslinjene for kompensasjon (...) av eggdonasjon. Hensikten med studien var å undersøke de ulike argumentene i den norske debatten om økonomisk kompensasjon for donasjon av egg. Tre gjennomgående temaer ble identifisert i høringsdokumentene: motivasjonens form og innhold, rettferdighet og donorbutikk. Et sentralt funn i høringen var en gjennomgående bekymring for økonomisk motivert donasjon. Samtidig var det bred enighet om at eggdonasjoner skulle være altruistiske. Altruisme ble forstått som et fravær av økonomisk motivasjon hos donoren, men uten at andre ikke-altruistiske motiver ble problematisert eller at forutsetningene for altruisme ble videre diskutert. Analysen viste også hvordan lignende argumenter ble vinklet ulikt for å kunne understøtte både en høyere og lavere kompensasjon. For eksempel endte en vektlegging av kvinners rettigheter i noen høringssvar opp som et forsvar for det høyeste forslaget til kompensasjon, mens i andre høringssvar ble den brukt som argument for et forbud mot enhver kompensasjon. Samlet sett gir denne studien innblikk i mangfoldet av argumenter som er blitt brukt i den norske debatten om økonomisk kompensasjon for eggdonasjon, og den viser viktigheten av å definere begrepene som brukes – som altruisme, frivillighet og økonomisk motivasjon – for å få bedre frem både enighetene og uenighetene mellom partene i debatten._ _Nøkkelord:_ altruisme, bioteknologi, eggcelledonasjon, godtgjørelse, motivasjon _English abstract_ After the revision of the Biotechnology Act in May 2020, egg donation in Norwegian became a fact. In the wake of the "biotechnology agreement" – a coalition between Ap, Frp and SV that secured a parliamentary majority for the changes in the law – the amount of compensation was to be determined for women who wish to donate eggs. A hearing was therefore held on the guidelines for egg donation, including options for how much the donor should be financially compensated. In this article, I have analyzed the consultation draft, the consultation responses and the final guidelines for compensation for egg donation. The purpose of the study was to examine the various arguments in the Norwegian debate about financial compensation for egg donation. Three consistent themes were identified in the consultation documents: the form and content of the motivation, justice and donor shop. A key finding in the consultation was a consistent concern about financially motivated donation. At the same time, there was broad agreement that egg donations should be altruistic. Altruism was understood as an absence of financial motivation on the part of the donor, but without other non-altruistic motives being problematized or the prerequisites for altruism being further discussed. The analysis also showed how similar arguments were angled differently in order to support both higher and lower compensation. For example, an emphasis on women's rights in some consultation responses ended up as a defense for the highest proposal for compensation, while in other consultation responses it was used as an argument for a ban on any compensation. Overall, this study provides an insight into the diversity of arguments that have been used in the Norwegian debate on financial compensation for egg donation, and it shows the importance of defining the terms used _–_ such as altruism, volunteering and financial motivation _–_ in order to better bring out both the agreements and the disagreements between the parties in the debate. _Keywords:_ altruism, biotechnology, egg cell donation, remuneration, motivation. (shrink)

In this paper, we start by comparing the two agents, Ann and Bob, who are involved in two car crashes. Whereas Ann crashes her car through no fault of her own, Bob crashes as a result of reckless driving. Unlike Ann, Bob is held criminally responsible, and the insurance company refuses to cover the car’s damages. Nonetheless, Ann and Bob both receive emergency hospital treatment that a third party covers, regardless of any assessment of personal responsibility. What warrants such apparent (...) exceptionalism with respect to personal responsibility in the healthcare context? We turn our attention to an understudied aspect of the debate on personal health responsibility, namely, the conceptualisation of the person in need of emergency hospital treatment. Drawing on the research of Joshua Knobe and Shaun Nichols, we propose that a context-dependent conceptualisation of the person may help explain a reluctance to ascribe responsibility to the individual for negative health outcomes. (shrink)

Childhood obesity is an increasing health problem. Prior empirical research suggests that, although discussing lifestyle behaviours with parents could help prevent childhood obesity and its health-related consequences, physicians are reluctant to address parental responsibility in the clinical setting. Therefore, this paper questions whether parents might be responsible for their children’s obesity, and if so, whether parental responsibility ought to be addressed in the physician–patient/parent encounter. We illustrate how different ideal-typical models of the physician–patient/parent interaction emphasise different understandings of patient autonomy (...) and parental responsibility and argue that these models advocate different responses to an appeal for discussing parents’ role in childhood obesity. We suggest that responsibility should be attributed to parents because of their parental roles in providing for their children’s welfare. We also argue that whether, and how, this responsibility gives rise to a requirement to act depends on the parents’ capacities. A deliberative-oriented physician–patient/parent interaction best captures the current ideals of antipaternalism, patient autonomy, and shared and evidence-informed decision-making, and might facilitate parental role development. We conclude that, while not discussing parental responsibility for childhood obesity in the clinical setting can be warranted in particular cases, this cannot be justified as a general rule. (shrink)

BackgroundPatients not attending their appointments without giving notice burden healthcare services. To reduce non-attendance rates, patient non-attendance fees have been introduced in various settings. Although some argue in narrow economic terms that behavioural change as a result of financial incentives is a voluntary transaction, charging patients for non-attendance remains controversial. This paper aims to investigate the controversies of implementing patient non-attendance fees.ObjectiveThe aim was to map out the arguments in the Norwegian public debate concerning the introduction and use of patient (...) non-attendance fees at public outpatient clinics.MethodsPublic consultation documents (2009–2021) were thematically analysed (n=84). We used a preconceived conceptual framework based on the works of Grant to guide the analysis.ResultsA broad range of arguments for and against patient non-attendance fees were identified, here referring to the acceptability of the fees’ purpose, the voluntariness of the responses, the effects on the individual character and institutional norms and the perceived fairness and comparative effectiveness of patient non-attendance fees. Whereas the aim of motivating patients to keep their appointments to avoid poor utilisation of resources and increased waiting times was widely supported, principled and practical arguments against patient non-attendance fees were raised.ConclusionA narrow economic understanding of incentives cannot capture the breadth of arguments for and against patient non-attendance fees. Policy makers may draw on this insight when implementing similar incentive schemes. The study may also contribute to the general debate on ethics and incentives. (shrink)