- The Surveillance State We're In: Moral Panic after the Westminster Attack
- Account Options
- THE MORAL STATE WE'RE IN A Manifesto for a 21st Century Society
Farmer, the social choice, or value, he was promoting was that no matter where a person lives or what health conditions exist, that person should receive health care that maximizes length and quality of life. That is a truly noble aspiration and one that I imagine many of us would associate ourselves with even though there cannot be experimental findings to back it up. Fairness can be achieved only if full and unbiased information is available about current conditions, and about the costs and benefits of one way of acting — one policy option — versus another.
The Surveillance State We're In: Moral Panic after the Westminster Attack
Yes, we could guess or assume. But when measurement is possible, guesses and assumptions are for the lazy and the irresponsible, not for the people most dedicated to a just outcome. What many in this room, and empirical analysts around the world, do every day is provide those essential ingredients that make a quest for distributive justice real, offering the necessary information that permits those who are pursuing social choices to know what they are actually doing and how to do it better. So, for instance, if we want to pursue the goal of good health for all, regardless of geography or wealth, we need a lot of information.
We need not only the facts about what drugs safely and effectively treat what health conditions, but also how each dollar spent on treating a particular ailment, or a given patient population, can be used to obtain the maximum benefit in terms of longevity and quality of life. Back again to the discussion with Dr. Farmer and others who critique cost-effectiveness analyses. The objection is to the existence of arbitrarily determined cost-effectiveness thresholds.
Some health economists have stated that interventions are cost-ineffective if they cost more than three times GDP per capita per disability-adjusted life year. Beyond the values of truth and justice, evidence-informed policymaking helps to realize the value of equality. The moral value of equality is codified in many parts of U. Your work in the field of evidence-informed policymaking has a very specific and particular role to play in advancing this ideal.
We would only know about the lives, livelihoods, and opinions of the people who have the greatest access to the public square. That means making sure we are including out-of-school children as well as children in school when learning is assessed. It means asking both married and unmarried women about their sexual and reproductive experiences.
It means dedicating sufficient resources to count homeless and undocumented residents in the population census. It means asking women questions not just about their childbearing but about their work, and men questions not just about their work but about their fatherhood. Finally, I want to talk about the contributions that evidence-informed policymaking can make in service of the value of human progress. On any given day, human beings have choices to make about whether we maintain the status quo, doing things as we have always done them, or we work to advance, perfect, optimize, and seek a better form of ourselves as individuals and our societies as collectives.
Virtually all religions encourage or mandate ever-purer and more loving thoughts and behavior, whether for benefit in this life or the next one.
The size of the self-help industry alone speaks to the impulse toward continuous improvement; businesses are judged on the basis of year-on-year growth; and nation-states are constantly trying to grow their economies, improve the health and well-being of their citizens, and sometimes expand their global power through military means.
It is no stretch to say that this value — the value of human progress — is amplified and served by the work of people in the evidence community. Guessing will lead us astray. We have to lift this conversation above internecine debates about methods, or an insistence that we are hardheaded not softhearted. We have to assert, strongly, persistently that failing to use facts and evidence in decision making about matters of consequence is not only dumb, but wrong — deeply, irretrievably wrong.
In contrast, championing the use of information and analysis is responsible, even righteous. Professionals who know what it is to measure, to monitor, to estimate, to weigh — we have the responsibility each and every day to serve the aspirations of progress, equality, justice and truth.
Skip to main navigation Skip to main content Skip to footer. The moral case for evidence in policymaking.
Just kidding. But this work is not only about truth. Just as Will Hutton looked at the political landscape at a turning point in Britain, Rabbi Julia will take the moral temperature of the nation by looking at the ways in which we treat the weakest amongst us. The National Health Service, government pensions and asylum seekers all make daily headlines, and here is a writer with the moral authority and mastery of the necessary information to undertake this timely project.
THE MORAL STATE WE'RE IN A Manifesto for a 21st Century Society
The way we treat the weak and vulnerable members of society has long been an established way to judge how civilised a society is. In this book, Julia looks at the extent to which the elderly are thought a burden, the way we care for the mentally ill, attitudes to asylum seekers and support for ex-offenders, as well as the care of children and the future of society in the UK.
Her straight-forward approach to what has elsewhere proven highly esoteric, is here written with ease and fluidity and with a style that is highly approachable for those interested in the state of their nation with purely social, rather than academic, motivations. With her uncomplicated but extremely intelligent and candid take on the issues that make daily headlines, and with Julia's high media profile, this book is guaranteed to tap into the state of our nation.
Includes exciting new sections, reviewing the past year's events, reception to her book and what - if anything - has changed in the way she sees our nation's moral predicament.