How does the operation of PHARMAC's 'Community Exceptional ...

position. Rawls ignores gender in discussing a person’s class or place in
society and excludes sex as a rational basis for discussing natural assets,
abilities, strength and opportunities. Whilst Rawls claims the theory of justice is
for all, the notions of fairness are generated from a dominant male position. He
fails to address justice of the gender system which has its roots in the sex roles
as one of the fundamental structures in our society (Moller-Okin, 1989). In this
sense gender cannot be ‘assumed away’ under a veil of ignorance because one
cannot ‘not know’ one’s gender (Waring, 2011). Moller-Okin (1989) suggested
that this flaw in Rawls’ theory leads her to ask “does this theory of justice apply
to women?” (p. 91).
Although the family is barely visible in Rawls’ theory of justice, in the well
ordered society, it is surprising that the family should not be mentioned as a
primary structure. Rawls does discuss the heads of families and the
responsibility placed on the ‘head’, and he deals with the utility of the family as
being an example of the difference principle. An example is given where the
utility of each member of the family may not allow for greater distributions to
one, at the expense of the whole family (A Theory of Justice). The opposite may
also apply where the greater distribution to the one, may enhance the well being
of the whole family.
Other critics of Rawls, for example, Lawrence Crocker (1977) suggests that the
difference principle appears to describe physical and material (financial)
benefits. Crocker points out that not all things are valued or have moral weight
because they relate to material or financial benefits. In Crocker’s (1977) article
titled “Equality, Solidarity and Rawls’ Maximin [sic]” he uses the example of
people who seek out situations in which they have strong feelings of community
and joint responsibility. Rawls’ theory would appear not to emphasise such
dispositions via the difference principle. This is possibly the most controversial
aspect of Rawls’ theory.
Cohen (2008), in his book Rescuing Justice and Equality criticised the
difference principle because whilst it attempted to protect the interests of the
least prosperous in society, he felt that Rawls inadvertently licenses greater
inequality. Cohen also points out that Rawls’ difference principle is based on
material incentives to both the most and the least privileged. He uses the
58