A drunk driver, a sober pedestrian and the allocation of tragically scarceand indivisible emergency hospital treatment

Le Grand describes a situation where a drunk driver, who has medical insura nce, is the cause of an accident in which he and a sober pedestrian, who ha s no medical insurance, are both equally and seriously injured. At the priv ate hospital to which they are both taken, there is available emergency tre atment far one of them only. Who should receive it? The issues raised by Le Grand's example are shown to be more interesting, more complex and less cl earcut than Le Grand suggests and implies. In particular, it is not the cas e that, unequivocally, the drunkenness of the driver establishes that the p edestrian rather than he should be treated nor that, unequivocally, the dri ver's possession of health insurance is morally irrelevant.