The Duty to Care is Not Dead Yet.

COVID-19 Duty to care Duty to treat Health care workers

Journal

Asian bioethics review
ISSN: 1793-9453
Titre abrégé: Asian Bioeth Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101608807

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Historique:
received: 27 02 2023
revised: 23 05 2023
accepted: 02 06 2023
pmc-release: 01 10 2024
medline: 9 10 2023
pubmed: 9 10 2023
entrez: 9 10 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed social shortcomings and ethical failures, but it also revealed strengths and successes. In this perspective article, we examine and discuss one strength: the duty to care. We understand this duty in a broad sense, as more than a duty to treat individual patients who could infect health care workers. We understand it as a prima facie duty to work to provide care and promote health in the face of risks, obstacles, and inconveniences. Although at least one survey suggested that health care workers would not respond to a SARS-like outbreak according to a duty to care, we give reasons to show that the response was better than expected. The reasons we discuss lead us to consider normative accounts of the duty to care based on the adoption of social roles. Then, we consider one view of the relationship between empirical claims and normative claims about the duty to care in the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we draw insight from Mengzi, with an emendation from Dewey. Our perspective leaves many question to research, but one point seems clear: there will be future pandemics and the need for health care workers who respond.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37808446
doi: 10.1007/s41649-023-00254-5
pii: 254
pmc: PMC10555964
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

505-515

Informations de copyright

© National University of Singapore and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of InterestThe authors declare no competing interests.

Références

N Engl J Med. 1988 Jun 23;318(25):1686-90
pubmed: 3374540
Am J Bioeth. 2008 Aug;8(8):4-19
pubmed: 18802849
Hastings Cent Rep. 1991 Mar-Apr;21(2):36-46
pubmed: 2045281
J Med Ethics. 2008 Jan;34(1):7-10
pubmed: 18156511
Asian Bioeth Rev. 2021 Jun 17;13(3):279-282
pubmed: 34155442
J Urban Health. 2005 Sep;82(3):378-88
pubmed: 16000654
Hastings Cent Rep. 1988 Apr-May;18(2):S10-20
pubmed: 11650065

Auteurs

Yali Cong (Y)

Department of Medical Ethics and Law, School of Health Humanities, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.

James Dwyer (J)

Center for Bioethics and Humanities, Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY USA.

Classifications MeSH