RESUMO
Globally, there has been an increasing uptake of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT). In the Philippines, the test is currently available through private laboratories and can be availed by families who can afford the out-of-pocket cost. In a country where elective termination of pregnancy is not an option, the question arises as to the relevance of this testing, even among health professionals. This is an exploratory qualitative study that explored the attitudes of Filipino parents of children with Down syndrome (DS) toward NIPT using thematic analysis of in-depth interviews. Study participants acknowledged the value of NIPT in providing early diagnosis and, subsequently, emotional, mental, spiritual, and financial preparation. This said, they also emphasized that such early detection may cause anxiety and even thoughts of termination for some, despite abortion being against the law and predominant religious beliefs. For those undergoing NIPT and receiving positive results, study participants highlighted the need to receive proper and nonbiased counseling from both health professionals and parents who have children with DS.
RESUMO
The just distribution of benefits and burdens of healthcare, at least in the contemporary Philippine context, is an issue that gravitates towards two opposing doctrines of welfarism and 'free enterprise.' Supported largely by popular opinion, welfarism maintains that social welfare and healthcare are primarily the responsibility of the government. Free enterprise (FE) doctrine, on the other hand, maintains that social welfare is basically a market function and that healthcare should be a private industry that operates under competitive conditions with minimal government control. I will examine the ethical implications of these two doctrines as they inform healthcare programmes by business and government, namely: (a) the Devolution of Health Services and (b) the Philippine Health Maintenance Organization (HMO). I will argue that these doctrines and the health programmes they inform are deficient in following respects: (1) equitable access to healthcare, (2) individual needs for premium healthcare, (3) optimal utilisation of health resources, and (4) the equitable assignment of burdens that healthcare entails. These respects, as considerations of justice, are consistent with an operational definition of 'power' proposed here as 'access to and control of resources.'
