Introduction
Human beings are entitled to good health as a basic necessity across the globe. Consequently, medical services should be provided to public members irrespective of their socio-cultural and economic backgrounds (Dusetzina et al., 2019). However, a case study entitled “The Ethics of Global Drug Pricing” indicates how developed countries with productive pharmaceutical companies capitalize on profitability over ethics when delivering life-saving prescriptions to patients (Hurst, 2017). From a moral perspective, it is immoral to commercialize vital medication products required by individuals for survival.
Treatment of chronic illnesses such as cancer, tuberculosis, and diabetes requires accuracy and time effectiveness for positive health outcomes (Dusetzina et al., 2019). The approach would be useful as all patients would access fundamental medical items. Government agencies and institutions in both developed and developing nations should be objective in integrating ethics to sustain global drug pricing standards.
Recognize Decision Requirement
Several ethical issues have been presented regarding drug pricing in the mentioned case. It is important to highlight the importance of the business context of pharmaceutical companies as evidenced in the United States (U.S.), United Kingdom (U.K.), and the European Union (E.U.). These countries have leading medical institutions that produce drugs for healthcare agencies across the globe (Dusetzina et al., 2019). The case highlights that some of the companies increase prices of life-saving medicines to maximize demand for profitability. This business approach would justify why drug prices hike during high-demand periods (Dusetzina et al., 2019). For instance, a rise in manufacturing cost would imply higher prices than before to cater to the production needs.
However, many patients fail to access vital drugs due to high and unaffordable prices. The ethical issue in drug pricing entails unreasonable profitability, which exploits individuals from low-income backgrounds. Patients suffering from chronic illnesses in developing nations succumb to treatable illnesses such as diabetes, tuberculosis, and cancer (Dusetzina et al., 2019). As a result, the element of high returns on capital investments in global drug pricing should be morally rectified with moral values that protect all public members seeking healthcare services.
Diagnosis and Analysis of Causes
Monopoly pricing constitutes justifiable reasons regarding expensive medication within the U.S. The country has leading pharmaceutical companies that are unmatched in production capabilities and scope of operation (Dusetzina et al., 2019). The experts employed in these entities depict high academic and professional standards to ensure the quality production of medical products. Monopoly pricing arises when companies use high monetary value to sell the product to patients. The case study provided notes that the companies can significantly increase pharmaceuticals prices (Wouters & Kanavos, 2017). The U.S. allows these entities to determine price tags based on market affordability and production costs. In essence, the model exploits patients who find vital medications unaffordable (Dusetzina et al., 2019).
Additionally, protection of patients in drug pricing is very limited in the U.S. Legislative institutions, and government agencies are restricted on their influence regarding the production, distribution, and pricing of essential pharmaceuticals. For instance, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) has no authoritative obligation over vaccine-producing companies in the U.S. (Dusetzina et al., 2019). As a result, these companies engage in monopoly pricing resulting in the inaccessibility of vital medicines.
Development of Alternatives for High Drug Prices
However, there are alternatives whose successful deployment would aid in fighting high drug prices. For instance, generic medicines are considered a useful substitute for expensive medication not available in developing nations (Wouters & Kanavos, 2017). Practically, the production of all-purpose pharmaceuticals is relatively cheaper than evidenced in original products. The products allow patients to access vital medication, which is available in many local pharmacies. Medical insurance presents an alternative aimed at overcoming the challenges of high drug prices. Healthcare government agencies in different countries have developed social entities that provide medical services to members (Dusetzina et al., 2019). The public is allowed to register for a medical scheme and ensure partial and affordable contribution monthly.
The National Health Service (NHS) in the U.K. allows the public patients up to 3 drugs that clinicians perceive useful in an illness’s recovery process. Similarly, the E.U. has adopted legislation to curb high drug prices from both local and imported pharmaceuticals. Both private and public health insurance covers allow members to seek quality medical care with limited concerns on associated fees and expenses (Wouters & Kanavos, 2017). Most importantly, governments in most countries are exercising their legislative role in fighting high drug prices.
Selection of Desired Alternative
Several options exist as alternatives to high drug expenses for the U.S. The case provided indicates that pharmaceutical companies are unregulated and their pricing strategies are internally and independently determined (Hurst, 2017). Market value and production cost include significant factors used by the firms to value their end products. The most desired alternative for the U.S. would include adopting commercial legislation against monopolistic pricing in the medical industry (Dusetzina et al., 2019). This would discourage profit-oriented entities from exploiting patients as part of discriminative practices facing many modern cities.
Moreover, commercial legislation on access to medicines includes anti-racism policies that punish medical institutions that discriminate against patients based on skin color. Federal and state agencies tasked with regulating healthcare practices should engage with pharmaceutical companies to ensure the affordability of critical medical products (Dusetzina et al., 2019). Cooperation and coordination would ensure that all parties involved in deliberating medical practices benefit equitably from a policy related to drug pricing (Dusetzina et al., 2019).
For instance, the CDC could cooperate with Pfizer drug producers to ensure equal access to COVID-19 vaccine to all Americans. Most fundamentally, drug pricing regulation in the U.S. would encourage democratic countries to adopt similar models intended to improve healthcare quality for their population.
Implementation of Alternatives for Decreasing Drug Prices
Moreover, the best alternative for the U.S. to reduce drug prices would include stakeholder intervention from the government and public members. Democratic countries allow negotiations amongst individuals to develop an optimal solution for a common challenge (Wouters & Kanavos, 2017). It is important to highlight that healthcare is a basic necessity that should be available to all individuals irrespective of their socio-cultural and economic backgrounds (Nass et al., 2017).
The U.S., consequently, should consider bringing together different players of its healthcare sector for a discussion on drug pricing (Dusetzina et al., 2019). In this perspective, the government should negotiate for affordable prices on behalf of public members. The latter should contribute by confirming affordability levels from a given sample (Hurst, 2017). This model would allow pharmaceutical companies to request production resources such as working capital from the government. Coordinating healthcare resource allocation and distribution practices would be fundamental for U.S. patients located in remote regions.
Evaluation and Feedback for Suggested Recommendations
Drug pricing regulations exist in other democratic countries with developed economies similar to the U.S. For instance, Canada has a board that determines the affordability of medicines that treat chronic illness (Hurst, 2017). Prices of medicinal products are distinct between the two developed North American countries due to the executive board’s intervention tasked with healthcare regulation responsibilities (Dusetzina et al., 2019).
Moreover, E.U. member countries such as France, Spain, and Italy also regulate drug prices for their public members (Wouters & Kanavos, 2017). These countries ensure sufficient and optimal distribution of medicines among patients suffering from diverse illnesses (Nass et al., 2017). Policy regulation on drug pricing would be useful for the U.S., which faces imminent social challenges regarding equal access to healthcare services with limited discrimination practices against minority communities (Wouters & Kanavos, 2017). Most importantly, federal and state intervention in production and pricing would allow the country to protect patients from exploitation in terms of drug prices intended for profitability.
Conclusion
Ethics is an important value for sustaining global drug pricing practices. Through moral behavior amongst healthcare stakeholders, the world can achieve consensus regarding equal access to medical services. The U.S. faces monopolistic pricing challenges due to unregulated pharmaceutical practices. Companies in this medical sector have the liberty to significantly increase product prices without any government interference.
Ethics are critical for pharmaceutical companies as it would positively and progressively transform production practices. Countries like Canada, Italy, and Spain have been successful in adopting regulatory practices concerning drug prices. As a result, the U.S. should consider similar measures as an alternative to increasing global drug prices, as evidenced across Europe. Equal access to healthcare services would be ethical as it includes all patients irrespective of their racial background or income-earning levels.
References
Dusetzina, S. B., Huskamp, H. A., & Keating, N. L. (2019). Specialty drug pricing and out-of-pocket spending on orally administered anticancer drugs in Medicare Part D, 2010 to 2019. Jama, 321(20), 2025-2028. Web.
Hurst, D. J. (2017). Restoring a reputation: invoking the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights to bear on pharmaceutical pricing. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 20(1), 105-117. Web.
Nass, S. J., Madhavan, G., & Augustine, N. R. (2017). Making medicines affordable: A national imperative. National Academies Press.
Wouters, O. J., & Kanavos, P. G. (2017). A comparison of generic drug prices in seven European countries: A methodological analysis. BMC health services research, 17(1), 1-7. Web.