Abstract
Whole genome sequencing (WGS) of a tumour may sometimes reveal additional potential targets for medical treatment. Practice variation in the use of WGS is therefore a source of unequal access to targeted therapies and, as a consequence, of disparities in health outcomes. Moreover, this may even be more significant if patients seek access to WGS by paying a relatively limited amount of money out of pocket, and sometimes effectively buy themselves a ticket to (very) expensive publicly funded treatments. Should resulting unequal access to WGS be considered unfair? Drawing from current practice in the Dutch healthcare system, known as egalitarian, we argue that differences in employment of WGS between hospitals are the consequence of the fact that medical innovation and its subsequent uptake inevitably takes time. Consequently, temporal inequalities in access can be deemed acceptable, or at least tolerated, because and insofar as, ultimately, all patients benefit. However, we argue against allowing a practice of out-of-pocket payments for WGS in publicly funded healthcare systems, for four reasons: because allowing private spending favours patients with higher socio-economic status significantly more than practice variation between hospitals does, may lead to displacement of publicly funded health care, does not help to ultimately benefit all, and may undermine the solidaristic ethos essential for egalitarian healthcare systems.