Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Quarantines: Between Precaution and Necessity. A Look at COVID-19.Vera Lúcia Raposo - 2021 - Public Health Ethics 14 (1):35-46.
    The events surrounding COVID-19, combined with the mandatory quarantines widely imposed in Asia and Europe since the virus outbreak, have reignited discussion of the balance between individual rights and liberties and public health during epidemics and pandemics. This article analyses this issue from the perspectives of precaution and necessity. There is a difficult relationship between these two seemingly opposite principles, both of which are frequently invoked in this domain. Although the precautionary principle encourages the use of quarantines, including mandatory quarantines, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Eliminating Categorical Exclusion Criteria in Crisis Standards of Care Frameworks.Catherine L. Auriemma, Ashli M. Molinero, Amy J. Houtrow, Govind Persad, Douglas B. White & Scott D. Halpern - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (7):28-36.
    During public health crises including the COVID-19 pandemic, resource scarcity and contagion risks may require health systems to shift—to some degree—from a usual clinical ethic, focused on the well-being of individual patients, to a public health ethic, focused on population health. Many triage policies exist that fall under the legal protections afforded by “crisis standards of care,” but they have key differences. We critically appraise one of the most fundamental differences among policies, namely the use of criteria to categorically exclude (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Cause for coercion: cause for concern?Maxwell J. Smith - forthcoming - Monash Bioethics Review:1-9.
    In his 2000 book, From Chaos to Coercion: Detention and the Control of Tuberculosis, Richard Coker makes a number of important observations and arguments regarding the use of coercive public health measures in response to infectious disease threats. In particular, Coker argues that we have a tendency to neglect public health threats and then demand immediate action, which can leave policymakers with fewer effective options and may require (or may be perceived as requiring) more aggressive, coercive measures to achieve public (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark