Which ethical principle is violated when adaptive equipment is given preferentially based on a client’s insurance type?

The ethical principle that is violated when adaptive equipment is allocated preferentially based on a client's insurance type is justice. Justice in healthcare refers to the fair and equitable distribution of resources and treatment options. It emphasizes the importance of treating individuals fairly without discrimination. When access to adaptive equipment is based on the type of insurance a client has, it implies that those with certain insurance plans may receive better or more timely support than those with different plans. This creates inequality and can result in some clients being disadvantaged solely due to their financial or insurance status, which directly conflicts with the principle of justice.

In contrast, the other principles—validity, autonomy, and beneficence—focus on different aspects of healthcare ethics. Validity pertains to the accuracy and relevance of assessments, autonomy relates to respecting a client's right to make their own decisions, and beneficence centers around acting in the best interest of the client. While all these principles are important in occupational therapy practice, in this scenario, the principle of justice is the most relevant to the unequal treatment based on insurance type.