Pandemic Justice: fairness, social inequality and COVID-19 healthcare priority-setting

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pandemic Justice

T2 - fairness, social inequality and COVID-19 healthcare priority-setting

AU - Nielsen, Lasse

AU - Albertsen, Andreas

PY - 2023/4

Y1 - 2023/4

N2 - A comprehensive understanding of the ethics of the COVID-19 pandemic priorities must be sensitive to the influence of social inequality. We distinguish between ex-ante and ex-post relevance of social inequality for COVID-19 disadvantage. Ex-ante relevance refers to the distribution of risks of exposure. Ex-post relevance refers to the effect of inequality on how patients respond to infection. In the case of COVID-19, both ex-ante and ex-post effects suggest a distribution which is sensitive to the prevalence social inequality. On this basis, we provide a generic fairness argument for the claim that welfare states ought to favour a healthcare priority scheme that gives particular weight to protecting the socially disadvantaged.

AB - A comprehensive understanding of the ethics of the COVID-19 pandemic priorities must be sensitive to the influence of social inequality. We distinguish between ex-ante and ex-post relevance of social inequality for COVID-19 disadvantage. Ex-ante relevance refers to the distribution of risks of exposure. Ex-post relevance refers to the effect of inequality on how patients respond to infection. In the case of COVID-19, both ex-ante and ex-post effects suggest a distribution which is sensitive to the prevalence social inequality. On this basis, we provide a generic fairness argument for the claim that welfare states ought to favour a healthcare priority scheme that gives particular weight to protecting the socially disadvantaged.

KW - Covid-19

KW - Covid 19

KW - healthcare priority-setting

U2 - 10.1136/jme-2022-108384

DO - 10.1136/jme-2022-108384

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 36600629

SN - 0306-6800

VL - 49

SP - 283

EP - 287

JO - Journal of Medical Ethics

JF - Journal of Medical Ethics

IS - 4

ER -