Daniel Dzah
Abstract
Open-access reader
Some restrictionist arguments justifying the duty to stay as a means of addressing medical brain drain have relied on reciprocity as the moral basis for their policy proposals. In this essay, I argue that such reciprocity-based justifications for the duty to stay ignore crucial conditions of fittingness as relates to the funding of medical training.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Some restrictionist arguments justifying the duty to stay as a means of addressing medical brain drain have relied on reciprocity as the moral basis for their policy proposals. In this essay, I argue that such reciprocity-based justifications for the duty to stay ignore crucial conditions of fittingness as relates to the funding of medical training.
Key concepts: Reciprocity (cultural anthropology), Duty, Law and economics, Political science, Law, Sociology, Social science