Regulating Patient Access to Therapeutics in Denmark: a Rhetorical Analysis of Welfare Imaginaries in Public Controversy
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Regulating Patient Access to Therapeutics in Denmark : a Rhetorical Analysis of Welfare Imaginaries in Public Controversy. / Møllebæk, Mathias.
In: Journal of Law and the Biosciences , Vol. 8, No. 2, Isaa047, 2021.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Regulating Patient Access to Therapeutics in Denmark
T2 - a Rhetorical Analysis of Welfare Imaginaries in Public Controversy
AU - Møllebæk, Mathias
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - In this article, I argue that the social imaginaries that inform biomedical regulation circulate not only in technical spheres populated by experts but that they are equally articulated (and vehemently contested) in national public spheres in more popular forms of communication. I examine the relation between a national healthcare imaginary and the regulation of therapeutics through a public controversy about access to an innovative therapeutic indicated for spinal muscular atrophy. The establishment of the Danish Medicines Council, a new health technology assessment institution, and its decision to restrict access to an innovative therapeutic sparked controversy in 2017 involving political proponents, adversaries, and patients among others. In a variety of ways they rhetorically mobilized or contested the Danish universalist welfare imaginary which contains promises and prospects of solidarity, security and absence of market forces in universal healthcare, including access to therapeutics. I use a combination of media content analysis and rhetorical close-reading methods to analyze how the imaginary was drawn upon in arguments for and against the new regulatory institution.
AB - In this article, I argue that the social imaginaries that inform biomedical regulation circulate not only in technical spheres populated by experts but that they are equally articulated (and vehemently contested) in national public spheres in more popular forms of communication. I examine the relation between a national healthcare imaginary and the regulation of therapeutics through a public controversy about access to an innovative therapeutic indicated for spinal muscular atrophy. The establishment of the Danish Medicines Council, a new health technology assessment institution, and its decision to restrict access to an innovative therapeutic sparked controversy in 2017 involving political proponents, adversaries, and patients among others. In a variety of ways they rhetorically mobilized or contested the Danish universalist welfare imaginary which contains promises and prospects of solidarity, security and absence of market forces in universal healthcare, including access to therapeutics. I use a combination of media content analysis and rhetorical close-reading methods to analyze how the imaginary was drawn upon in arguments for and against the new regulatory institution.
U2 - 10.1093/jlb/lsaa047
DO - 10.1093/jlb/lsaa047
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 34408897
VL - 8
JO - Journal of Law and the Biosciences
JF - Journal of Law and the Biosciences
SN - 2053-9711
IS - 2
M1 - Isaa047
ER -
ID: 237144406