Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Justice and COVID-19
At the time of writing the COVID-19 pandemic was entering its ninth month, with nearly 800 000 recorded fatalities and 22 million infections in 188 countries and territories.1
In previous ethics briefings2 we raised concerns about the possibility that demand for life-sustaining treatment would overwhelm supply, with a consequent requirement for health professionals to make challenging triage decisions. Fortunately, to date, these have largely not been realised, although there is a possibility that countries in which containment measures have been less-successful, such as South Africa, may still be required to triage.3
Despite the successful ‘flattening of the curve’ in many countries, there is a wide consensus that we remain firmly within the pandemic. Enormous practical challenges remain. It is unclear whether the pandemic will ultimately take the form of two or more successive waves, or whether the patchwork of global responses will lead to a sustained slow ‘burn’ with sporadic flare-ups.4 Areas of uncertainty include whether infection confers some immunity, how long any such immunity might last, whether effective vaccines can be developed and if seasonal temperature fluctuations alter the spread of the virus. The pandemic will also be fundamentally shaped by the decisions that governments make and the extent to which their diktats are complied with by citizens.
With the – possibly temporary – retreat of urgent clinical ethics issues, such as triage, opportunities have arisen to reflect on some of the ethical questions that underlie and structure the demanding policy decisions that governments are wrestling with. One of the early questions was how to balance the complex constellation of costs and benefits associated with lockdown. Countries that …
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- ‘When will this end? Will it end?’ The impact of the March–June 2020 UK COVID-19 lockdown response on mental health: a longitudinal survey of mothers in the Born in Bradford study
- Demand for self-managed online telemedicine abortion in eight European countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: a regression discontinuity analysis
- Why women choose at-home abortion via teleconsultation in France: drivers of telemedicine abortion during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic
- Abortion regulation in Europe in the era of COVID-19: a spectrum of policy responses
- Disruptions to the procurement of medical abortion medicines during COVID-19: a scoping review
- Telemedicine medical abortion at home under 12 weeks’ gestation: a prospective observational cohort study during the COVID-19 pandemic
- How does vulnerability to COVID-19 vary between communities in England? Developing a Small Area Vulnerability Index (SAVI)
- Examining the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on family mental health in Canada: findings from a national cross-sectional study
- Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on abortions and births in Sweden: a mixed-methods study
- A trans-national examination of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on abortion requests through a telemedicine service