BackgroundThe West African Ebola virus epidemic from 2014 to 2016 is unprecedented in its scale, surpassing all previous and subsequent Ebola outbreaks since 1976. This epidemic provoked a humanitarian emergency that extended to different spheres of life, making visible ethical challenges in addition to medical, economic, and social ones. The present article aims to identify and differentiate the scope of ethical issues associated with the Ebola epidemic.MethodsAn online media analysis was performed on articles published from March 2014 to September 2015 (...) in ten preselected academic journals (scientific press) and two online newspapers (lay press). Two methodological approaches were combined: a systematic literature search and a qualitative content analysis. An additional keyword search was conducted on the PubMed database for the period after the end of the Ebola epidemic (2016-2020) to obtain an overview of research dealing with medical ethics due to the epidemic and to compare these results with the identified ethical challenges.ResultsA total of 389 articles dealing with the subject fields “Ebola epidemic” and “ethics” were researched. For qualitative content analysis, the time span with the highest article density was selected and a total of 64 articles were included (15 scientific articles, 49 popular articles). Five core ethical challenges of the Ebola epidemic emerged: 1. Responsibility and Accountability, 2. Spillover Effects, 3. Research and Development, 4. Health Communication, and 5. Resource Allocation. Articles in academic journals were dominated by the discussion of normative aspects in the area of “research and development”, while newspaper articles focused on aspects of “responsibility and accountability”.ConclusionAn ethical discussion of the Ebola epidemic requires an examination of as many of the ethical dimensions involved as possible. The presented investigation of the two types of media with regard to the Ebola epidemic offers this possibility of a more comprehensive insight into this diversity as a basis for ethical discussions. (shrink)

The duty to treat has been at the center of the moral and public debate surrounding the physician-patient relationship, especially in epidemics. The topic of discussion may be the physician who “fights” (the “hero physician”), the contaminated professional, the doctor who refuses to treat or the resigning physician. This may increase potential conflicts between the physicians’ individual values and those of their patients, conflicts that can have personal and social consequences. Doctors implicitly assume that treating patients may generate risks for (...) his/her own well-being, but none should accept risks related to insufficient protective equipment or inappropriate protocols, or other external causes that unjustifiably increase them. Everybody involved in healthcare has the duty to minimize the risks imposed on the patient; otherwise not only physicians are at risk, but also patients and society, which could receive less healthcare or even develop other diseases. (shrink)